By DEXTER DUGGAN
A Mom and Dad raised their son and daughter at home in Southern California, where both children were born. After the daughter grew up and married, Mom looked forward longingly to having a grandchild she could help with.
But Southern California was too expensive for the newlyweds. After a couple of years of living in apartments, they moved to the snowy Midwest, where the groom had family ties.
The new couple both worked and continued to live in apartments until they had enough money to put down on their own house, which cost far less in their Midwestern state than it would have back in California. Meanwhile, their baby boy arrived.
Grandma back on the West Coast was thrilled, but she also was three hours distant by jet travel. No dropping by every day or two to giggle with the baby. At best, she could fly back only a couple of times a year to visit for a week or so, but otherwise had to be in contact by phone or emailed photos. Grandma’s own son continued to live in his native Southern California.
This grandma and her husband still are paying off the mortgage on their own California home, which they had to refinance more than once. They don’t have footloose financial freedom.
Life involves limitations and making choices and dealing with consequences.
These family members are real people and also U.S. citizens known to this writer, not a hypothetical example. They can’t have all that they want.
This is a family that has become separated by circumstances familiar to many other Americans, too, who have to make necessary adjustments — circumstances worsened by years of the Barack Obama economy and also unlimited, unauthorized immigration into the U.S. that makes demands on obtaining U.S. resources.
Republican Donald Trump heard hard-pressed Americans’ voices on the way to his presidential victory. From the first, one of his successful campaign themes opposed unlimited immigration.
At the U.S. Catholic bishops’ regular fall assembly, coincidentally soon after Trump’s election, the bishops acknowledged his victory but still sounded their own note about their dedication to undefined “immigration” while giving a nod to “security” and U.S. law.
The immigration statement affirmed by the bishops included this passage:
“We believe the family unit is the cornerstone of society, so it is vital to protect the integrity of the family. For this reason, we are reminded that behind every ‘statistic’ is a person who is a mother, father, son, daughter, sister or brother and has dignity as a child of God. We pray that as the new administration begins its role leading our country, it will recognize the contributions of refugees and immigrants to the overall prosperity and well-being of our nation.
“We will work to promote humane policies that protect refugees and immigrants’ inherent dignity, keep families together, and honor and respect the laws of this nation,” the statement continued.
There was no concession of the possibility that some of the newcomers would have to leave the U.S. or modify their expectations, or that they had behaved in such a way as to require their departure.
A preface to the statement said it was “repeating the words to our brothers and sisters who come to the country seeking a better life: ‘We are with you’.”
The statement, which was from Bishop Eusebio Elizondo, chairman of the USCCB Committee on Migration, concluded:
“We pray for President-elect Trump and all leaders in public life, that they may rise to the responsibilities entrusted to them with grace and courage. And may all of us as Catholics and Americans remain a people of solidarity with others in need and a nation of hospitality which treats others as we would like to be treated.”
Elizondo said, “I offer a special word to migrant and refugee families living in the United States: be assured of our solidarity and continued accompaniment as you work for a better life.”
Meanwhile, the Phoenix-based Arizona Republic newspaper posted on November 18: “There has been a sharp rise in the number of Central American families and unaccompanied minors entering the country illegally along the border with Mexico in the Yuma area of southwestern Arizona….
“The rise in Central American migrants arriving at the U.S. border contributed to an overall increase in apprehensions by the Border Patrol in fiscal year 2016 to 408,870 from 331,333, a 23 percent increase,” the story added.
While the USCCB may think that “statistics” are undesirable, staggering numbers are part of the grim reality of the continuing problem.
The Wanderer contacted a woman in southern Arizona, with family on both sides of the border, whom we’ve quoted before. She again asked not to be named because of safety concerns.
After reading the USCCB statement cited above, she observed that it said nothing about a responsibility to assimilate, even though when flying back to Rome from Sweden recently, “Pope Francis said the countries cannot take in people who do not assimilate. . . .
“Further, family reunification in this country should not be the first goal,” she continued. “The first goal should be to keep the nuclear family and the extended family together in the country of their own culture. To fail to advocate for that is remiss on the part of the bishops, who should be aware of the beauty and civilizing influence of deep and nurtured family relationships.
“Donald Trump will hopefully be able to do the real act of solidarity, that of helping every country to develop so that each country can have its own version of the American dream and mutually beneficial relationships,” she said.
“He can effect such positive change in the sending countries in many ways,” she said. “One possibility that he has alluded to is to effect change with re-negotiated trade agreements which contain worker protection and human-rights provisions, which if breached by the other nation will be subjected to diplomatic and financial sanctions.”
Both St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI recommended the “most effective solution” to be “fix(ing) the cause of massive migration within the sending countries,” so there is no need to emigrate, she said.
A writer and retired Arizona Catholic physician, James Asher, also commented for The Wanderer. He began by citing another portion of the USCCB migration statement following Trump’s victory. That portion said:
“Serving and welcoming people fleeing violence and conflict in various regions of the world is part of our identity as Catholics. The Church will continue this life-saving tradition. Today, with more than 65 million people forcibly displaced from their homes, the need to welcome refugees and provide freedom from persecution is more acute than ever, and 80 of our dioceses across the country are eager to continue this wonderful act of accompaniment born of our Christian faith.
“We stand ready to work with a new administration to continue to ensure that refugees are humanely welcomed without sacrificing our security or our core values as Americans. A duty to welcome and protect newcomers, particularly refugees, is an integral part of our mission to help our neighbors in need,” the USCCB said.
However, Asher commented to The Wanderer, “The tragedy of 65 million people displaced from their homes clearly calls for a response from those of us living in stable countries. They need safety, shelter, work, and needs met. Who should do this and where? Is transplanting them to our soil the only option?
“It is easy to say we welcome them without sacrificing our security or core values, but millions of them, who are readily identifiable, have strong and ancient religious traditions that severely threaten our core values and could overwhelm our security measures should they become strong enough,” Asher said.
“This is easily discernible in the books they hold sacred, with attention especially directed to the Medina verses, which abrogate the more peaceable and irrelevant Mecca verses.
“It has been proposed that a way of vetting them would entail questioning as to their willingness to support the American way of life. However, this suggestion is made no doubt unawares that any deception which promotes Islam (taqiyya, kitman) is acceptable in that faith,” he said.
“Let us instead set up well-organized, comfortable, humane refugee camps which offer free access to information about other faiths, and safety for any who wished to convert to another religion. Do this in some country outside the U.S., preferably a Muslim country. If they convert to something, they could be reevaluated for immigration to America,” Asher said.
The “Religion of Peace” website about Islam (thereligionofpeace.com) says, “There are several forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, the best-known being taqiyya. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam — in some cases by gaining the trust of nonbelievers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.” It defines kitman as “lying by omission.”
On the other hand, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (aifdemocracy.org), founded by Arizona physician M. Zuhdi Jasser, strongly argues for Islamic religious reform and the separation of mosque and state.
Its website says: “AIFD envisions a future wherein Muslims never feel a conflict between their personal faith and their commitment to individual liberty and freedom. Rather, we work to empower Muslims to be primary advocates for liberty and freedom.”
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress