First United Methodist bans term ‘illegal immigrant’ as ‘dehumanizing (American, Christ)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Being that the Ten Commandments are Mosaic Law ("eye for an eye"), and that Jesus specifically subjugated them under new proclamations ("Love thy neighbor as thyself"), your (note the correct form) reply doesn't address how this topic is playing out...
Even the Ten Commandments have had differing interpretations:
"Thou shall not KILL" vs. "Thou shall not MURDER"
This is going to be one long debate, and stands to offend a great many...
Are we going to argue from the perspective of a Protestant Minister, or from Catholic Church doctrine that a Priest is a representation of Christ (the specific reason they are always male) to their congregation?...
I don't even know if "The Rule of Law" can be defined without argument...
Regardless of what Christian religion one follows the ten commandments are for all to follow.
As for the rule of law in regards to our immigration laws there is nothing unfair or unjustified about them. The only ones arguing against such laws are those who have selfish motives, IMO.
Regardless of what Christian religion one follows the ten commandments are for all to follow...
An even broader overstatement...
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
...As for the rule of law in regards to our immigration laws there is nothing unfair or unjustified about them. The only ones arguing against such laws are those who have selfish motives, IMO.
Haven't you (notice the correct form) argued recently that defined portions of immigration law are too loose on requirements, or are unfair to more diversified applicants/nations?...
Haven't you (notice the correct form) argued recently that defined portions of immigration law are too loose on requirements, or are unfair to more diversified applicants/nations?...
It isn't an overstatement to say that "all" Christians are supposed to follow the ten commandments. If you are a Christian however, you believe everyone should follow them.
What does your last paragraph have to do with illegal immigration?
..If you are a Christian however, you believe everyone should follow them...
As a Christian, I do not believe nor expect that everyone should follow the Ten Commandments...
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
What does your last paragraph have to do with illegal immigration?
You (notice the correct form) stated that there is "nothing unfair or unjustified" about our immigration laws, but want them tightened and portions implemented differently...
As a Christian, I do not believe nor expect that everyone should follow the Ten Commandments...
You (notice the correct form) stated that there is "nothing unfair or unjustified" about our immigration laws, but want them tightened and portions implemented differently...
Most Christians wouldn't agree with you. Wanting our immigration laws tightened and/or implemented differenty is not unfair. It is in the best interests of this country. You seem however, to care more about the interests of immigrants both legal and illegal. That is where we part company.
But my faith is not based on whether people, Christians or not, will "agree with me"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
...Wanting our immigration laws tightened and/or implemented differenty is not unfair. It is in the best interests of this country. You seem however, to care more about the interests of immigrants both legal and illegal. That is where we part company.
Maybe I have to use examples for you (notice the correct form) to understand. I've stated that part of immigration law allows a U.S. citizen to petition the government (so based on the First Amendment) for a judgement of whether their illegal alien spouse can be able to gain legal status (an I-601). If you object to that portion of immigration law, you do do not think it is "justified". To say that immigration law, being primarily based on a U.S. citizen sponsor, is not "fair" to nations that may have a diversity you want (but not the required relationship to a U.S. citizen) is also a difference with the current implementation.
In reality, I might have less difference with actual immigration law than you do...
Specifically, I am a very big advocate for the U.S. citizens that may get a determination from filing an I-601 to be aware of that process and use it, even if it comes out against them...
My end goal is to reach a point where there is no one in the United States in an undefined immigration status...
You (notice the correct form) can read that however you would like, but remember my first statement in this response...
But my faith is not based on whether people, Christians or not, will "agree with me"...
Maybe I have to use examples for you (notice the correct form) to understand. I've stated that part of immigration law allows a U.S. citizen to petition the government (so based on the First Amendment) for a judgement of whether their illegal alien spouse can be able to gain legal status (an I-601). If you object to that portion of immigration law, you do do not think it is "justified". To say that immigration law, being primarily based on a U.S. citizen sponsor, is not "fair" to nations that may have a diversity you want (but not the required relationship to a U.S. citizen) is also a difference with the current implementation.
In reality, I might have less difference with actual immigration law than you do...
Specifically, I am a very big advocate for the U.S. citizens that may get a determination from filing an I-601 to be aware of that process and use it, even if it comes out against them...
My end goal is to reach a point where there is no one in the United States in an undefined immigration status...
You (notice the correct form) can read that however you would like, but remember my first statement in this response...
" No one with an undefined immigration status" = amnesty/legalization for some, many or most, right?
All Christians believe in the ten commandments and follow them. They also expect other Christians to do the same.
But my faith is not based on whether people, Christians or not, will "agree with me"...
Maybe I have to use examples for you (notice the correct form) to understand. I've stated that part of immigration law allows a U.S. citizen to petition the government (so based on the First Amendment) for a judgement of whether their illegal alien spouse can be able to gain legal status (an I-601). If you object to that portion of immigration law, you do do not think it is "justified". To say that immigration law, being primarily based on a U.S. citizen sponsor, is not "fair" to nations that may have a diversity you want (but not the required relationship to a U.S. citizen) is also a difference with the current implementation.
In reality, I might have less difference with actual immigration law than you do...
Specifically, I am a very big advocate for the U.S. citizens that may get a determination from filing an I-601 to be aware of that process and use it, even if it comes out against them...
My end goal is to reach a point where there is no one in the United States in an undefined immigration status...
You (notice the correct form) can read that however you would like, but remember my first statement in this response...
I'll have to agree with that. They should be deported immediately.
But my faith is not based on whether people, Christians or not, will "agree with me"...
Maybe I have to use examples for you (notice the correct form) to understand. I've stated that part of immigration law allows a U.S. citizen to petition the government (so based on the First Amendment) for a judgement of whether their illegal alien spouse can be able to gain legal status (an I-601). If you object to that portion of immigration law, you do do not think it is "justified". To say that immigration law, being primarily based on a U.S. citizen sponsor, is not "fair" to nations that may have a diversity you want (but not the required relationship to a U.S. citizen) is also a difference with the current implementation.
In reality, I might have less difference with actual immigration law than you do...
Specifically, I am a very big advocate for the U.S. citizens that may get a determination from filing an I-601 to be aware of that process and use it, even if it comes out against them...
My end goal is to reach a point where there is no one in the United States in an undefined immigration status...
You (notice the correct form) can read that however you would like, but remember my first statement in this response...
A house divided cannot stand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
