As an example of why the subject of immigration reform is such a difficult subject to have a clear cut opinion about, let’s look at two extremes. On one side, you have the anti-immigration forces that are trying to shut up Catholic bishops by bringing up the Scandal.
Such priestly precepts are part of a growing campaign by churches, especially the Catholic Church, to promote the acceptance of illegal aliens. But such campaigns will only exacerbate the alienation that already exists between many Americans and the Catholic Church.
Despite the cardinal’s overreaction, the target of the House bill is not humanitarian priests, but smugglers and others who aid and abet illegal aliens for monetary or other gain. But if a priest knowingly aids and abets aliens who violate the law, why should he (or she) not be charged? After all, the priest sexual abuse cases have shown that it is rather naïve to assume that priests are immune from ungodly sins.
Okay, I agree that the bill doesn’t target those who seek to give normal humanitarian aid to the needy, but the writer Ian de Silva’s ham-handed use of the sex-abuse scandal to try to shut up Catholics is clumsy and insulting to the rest of the Catholic Church, apart from the covering-up bishops and pervert priests. He even claims that the Church’s holding up marriage as an indissoluble sacramental bond is hypocritical: “The Catholic Church’s defiant support for illegal aliens is particularly hypocritical when you consider that this is the same church that refuses to marry American citizens if they have been previously divorced, yet it somehow thinks it has a duty to aid and abet people who have no right to be in the country in the first place.” That doesn’t even make sense.
Anti-“European” Extremists of the Left
Technorati Tags: anti-Catholic, bishops, immigration