Print Article | Email Article | Write To Us

Daily News

How Catholic Is Newt Gingrich's Immigration Position? (3508)

Catholic convert running for president displays stance on illegal aliens that is close to the bishops' view.

12/06/2011 Comments (16)
Spencer Platt/Getty Images News/Getty Images

Newt Gingrich speaks to reporters at the Union League Club in Manhattan Dec. 5, following a meeting with Donald Trump in New York City.

– Spencer Platt/Getty Images News/Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Newt Gingrich, the GOP presidential candidate and recent Catholic convert, is experiencing a jump in support — despite his views on what is a hot-button issue among Republicans.

During a televised debate, Gingrich staked out a position on immigration reform that distinguished him from his fellow GOP candidates: He advocated legislation designed to keep “families together.”

Although Gingrich’s stance on immigration has drawn a firestorm of criticism from his Republican rivals, he is the only GOP candidate to put forward a position on immigration that in its basic approach affords parallels to that of the U.S. Catholic hierarchy.

“He’s someone we could work with on this issue,” said Kevin Appleby, director of migration policy at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. Appleby stressed that he was not endorsing Gingrich and that there remains a “gap in specifics” between what Gingrich proposes and the position of the U.S. bishops.

Appleby added, however, that the former speaker of the House is “moving in the right direction.”

“It is heartening,” Appleby said, “that one of the Republican candidates is talking about a humane solution and using the word ‘humane.’”

Gingrich made news when he came out during a recent GOP debate against deporting longtime illegal aliens and in favor of an approach that would allow a pathway to legal status.

“If you’ve been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you’ve been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don’t think we’re going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out,” he said during the debate.

“I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families that have been here a quarter century,” Gingrich added.

“Gingrich’s emphasis on keeping families together is right out of the bishops’ playbook,” said Appleby.

“When I saw that quote, I thought that this was a reflection of Newt’s being a Catholic,” said David DeCosse, who teaches Catholic social teaching at Santa Clara University in California and has written on immigration for America magazine. Like Appleby, DeCosse stressed that he wasn’t endorsing Gingrich.


The Field’s Reaction

Gingrich has also supported parts of the DREAM Act, which was designed to create a way for younger illegal immigrants who serve in the U.S. military or attend college and have a record of good conduct to become U.S. citizens.

For other illegal immigrants, Gingrich is proposing something less than full citizenship, but not ruling out citizenship either, if they will get in line and follow the rules.

“I am suggesting a certification of legality with no right to vote and no right to become an American citizen unless they go home and apply through the regular procedures back home and get in line behind everybody else who has obeyed the law and stayed back there,” he said at a recent event in Naples, Fla.

Still, conservatives — including the respected columnist Thomas Sowell, who wrote at National Review that Gingrich’s stance on immigration provides him with “more baggage that he needs to overcome” — have been quick to criticize.

GOP hopeful Mitt Romney said that Gingrich’s plan would make the U.S. a “magnet” for illegal immigration, while Michele Bachmann charged that Gingrich’s plan amounts to “amnesty,” a charge Gingrich quickly denied.

Former Sen. Rick Santorum, the other Catholic in the GOP field, also suggested that Gingrich was advocating amnesty a few days after the debate in an interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader.

“Do I believe what Newt is suggesting is amnesty? Well, even he said after the debate the other night that millions of people would be able to stay in this country as a result of this proposal,” Santorum was quoted as saying on an ABC news site. “I don’t know what you call amnesty. Does amnesty only mean full citizenship, or does it mean you are forgiven for your transgressions and you are allowed to stay here under some status? If that’s amnesty, then that’s clearly what Newt is suggesting.”

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who was once a favorite of conservatives in the Republican Party, fell in the polls after defending his state’s policy of providing in-state tuition for students brought to the U.S. illegally as children.

On MSNBC, the political talk-show host Joe Scarborough remarked that Gingrich had “just strapped on the same TNT that blew Rick Perry” by stating his position on immigration.

Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who has supported in-state tuition for the children of illegal aliens, has not jumped into this fray. Ron Paul has not weighed in on the Gingrich controversy either, but he is against breaking up families by deportation and in favor of some status short of citizenship. He believes that the U.S. should get rid of what he regards as incentives for illegal immigration, including free hospital care and welfare benefits.


25-Year Wait

Although pleased by Gingrich’s overall stand on immigration, Appleby, of the U.S. bishops conference, says that there are some areas of disagreement between the bishops and Gingrich.

Appleby says that the 25-year residency period Gingrich stated as necessary before illegal immigrants can regularize their legal status is too long. The time lived in the U.S. should be at least five years, Appleby said, but not as long as Gingrich stipulated.

The bishops believe that before citizenship is granted, an illegal immigrant must meet certain requirements, including paying a fine, settlement of back taxes, good standing without any legal impediment and acquiring use of at least basic English. But, apparently unlike Gingrich, they do believe that a permanent intermediate status between being citizens and being illegal is unacceptable.

As for Gingrich’s insistence that to acquire citizenship an illegal immigrant must first go home and get in line, Appleby said that this could prove acceptable if it only entails crossing the border and returning. However, if this stipulation requires going back to an immigrant’s original home and starting the process there, that is asking too much.

Gingrich supports a guest-worker program that would allow workers to come to the U.S. legally and then return home when their work season ends. The U.S. bishops have opposed such a program because it can lead to abuse of workers. But Appleby said that the bishops might be willing to accept a guest-worker program if there are stringent protections for workers and it is part of a broader program of reform.

Catholic writer Russell Shaw, who is also not endorsing Gingrich, said that the bishops should welcome Gingrich’s views.

“If I were a wise and prudent bishop, I’d not get into a fight with Mr. Gingrich, but would instead say, ‘Thank God he is moving towards our position.’”

Register correspondent Charlotte Hays writes from Washington.

 

 

Filed under 2012 presidential race, immigration, newt gingrich, us catholic bishops

Comments

Post a Comment

Catholics, and most certainly our Bishops, should take the immigration issue up with Mexico and generally in Central and South America.

If the good people of Mexico (and other countries) voted out government corruption, Mexican citizens would cease their immigration north.

Recognizing the Blessings of so many natural resources God gave this part of the Americas, why focus on the symptom and not the cause.  All this posturing by Catholics on immigration gives so many good people in America pause, which then further exacerbates the rising tide of prejudice against our religion.

Mexico, Central and South America have all the Blessings of God to prosper just like Canada and the United States. If God had abandon this region on earth, well then Catholics have a just concern. But this is not the case. And if you want more proof, study the words of Our Lady Of Guadalupe wherein She encouraged humility not grandstanding.

Undoubtedly, Catholic Bishops need not launch another theater of argumentation and admonishment at a time when so many American citizens see the Church as tarnished. And most certainly our Bishops should not be naive in that the immigrant is simply a pawn the Democrat party uses to solicit votes. OK, support Democrat candidates on the theory that they are more sympathetic with the illegal alien and ensure abortion from conception to the moment of birth. Surely, our Bishops know better, yes?

Please, Bishops take this issue to Mexico.

If Newt were not a Catholic convert would we really see and read anything about him on this website?

How Catholic are his views on the death penalty?  On torture?  On extraordinary rendition to countries that can torture on behalf of the United States?  On the impact of sanctions that only cause suffering of the infirmed, women, and children instead of their governments?  On supporting endless wars that have not and would never pass the Just War doctrine of the Catholic Church?

It’s clear that Newt’s “enlightenment” regarding immigration is a political courting of the growing Latino vote.  As a Hispanic Catholic, I find Newt utterly entrenched in the culture of death because of his views on torture, war, and his disregard for the dignity of the human person to be free from violence and coercion, even from their own governments.  He is the epitome of a pandering politician and waiting for him to have a sincere and consistent life-affirming ethic is an exercise in futility.

It is unquestionably clear to me that the only candidate that even comes close to respecting the dignity of human free will is Ron Paul.  In my opinion, deference to liberty in service of life is much more preferable than the deference to tyranny in subjugation of life.

Response to, Rivals say Gingrich stance is equivalent to amnesty.

As an American of Puerto Rican Heritage and lifelong Republican Conservative I do not view the plan proposed by Newt Gingrich as amnesty.  I consider it as a plan with strategic border enforcement and human indulgencies. Although not perfect and not enough for many, it is a plan of which should be explored as an alternative to status- quo.  Today unfortunately President Obama, Congressional democrats and most of the Republican candidates those seeking re-election and or Republican presidential nomination have not given any true commitment to developing an immigration sensible strategic plan of action.  Although those entering our country undocumented from many areas of Eastern Europe and other places yet they remain off the radar. We must all realize that when the leadership in our country expresses their opinions and or produces any form of a immigration strategy, it’s interpreted as targeting directly the Latino immigrant community. Speaker Gingrich rivals must realize their opinions and or reflection on proposals such as that, which Speaker Gingrich has proposed has direct impact on the Latino community and if nominated, may very well negatively impact their own strategy. 

As Republicans I ask, what do we have today? The airwaves are overwhelmed by the negative bombardment from conservative talking heads. Many candidates including Michele Bachmann are spewing English Only and more… Although I am as many others are tired and frustrated of being asked press #1 for English, yet I take offense when someone states “This is America - Speak English” I do recognize the official language of the United States of America is English and all should do likewise. I do support English as the official language of the nation to be spoken but it is unacceptable to mandate and or legislate and conduct all federal business in English only and ban other languages to be spoken; becoming a slippery slope. I find this to be unproductive, disruptive and falling short of helping we reach our “big tent” objectives. If the rivals and party leaders continue with its anti-Latino proposals, we will never be able to regain any of our Republican Latino advances within our own community. We will alienate and polarize the Latino community and its electorate.

We Republicans must take pride in being the party with demonstrated leadership in diversity through our past policies, sensitivities and accomplishments including the many major authoritative Latino appointments. Our past Republican leaders developed and set positive Latino policies and initiative such as President George Herbert Walker Bush, Congressman Jack Kemp and our former chairman Lee Atwater (Mr. Big Tent), to name a few and continue today. Let us not forget the many Latino friendly legislation passed and appointments by Republican administrations in my time dating back to NYS Governor Nelson Rockefeller and President Nixon of which I personally was a staff member on the Committee to Re-Elect Nixon. The timing is such that we as a Party cannot develop any reasons of perceived conflicts with our Latinos community and we should embrace the Latino experience in the United States. Not for us to be seen as haters. As a Republican American Latino leader I do not endorse or support amnesty. That, which is proposed and submitted by Newt Gingrich, is not AMNESTY.

Rubén Estrada Chairman,
Latino National Republican Coalition of New York State

President, Republican National Hispanic Assembly of Orange County NY

Tel845.537.1307

The numbers of politicians enthusiastic by passing ‘THE LEGAL WORKFORCE ACT’ is rising, and now only needs 32 more of sponsors for its introduction to the House floor. This would have exceptional ramifications for the ailing job market, in rejecting illegal aliens and replacing them with citizens and legal diverse workers.  The numbers of politicians enthusiastic of passing ‘THE LEGAL WORKFORCE ACT’ is rising, and now only needs 32 more of sponsors for its introduction to the House floor. This would have exceptional ramifications for the ailing job market, in rejecting illegal aliens and replacing them with citizens and legal decisive workers. This is not a pogrom against any race or nationality; it’s not a witch hunt to stop Blacks, Hispanics, Europeans, and Pacific Islanders, Asian or other persons. It’s about keeping to the law, the ‘Rule of Law’ like aiding and abetting millions of illegal alien from every hemisphere across the world. It’s about corruption in Washington from both parties to hire cheap labor and exploit it; it’s also about millions of votes in future years, to undermine fair and equal electoral laws. You have seen the outcome after the original amnesty of rampant fraud by business owners, who will be held liable for not implementing form I-9 and not running a electronic E-Verify process. E-Verify will become—MANDATORY—for every business and if not complying face harsh penalties.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich would have American taxpayers keep supporting the millions still unlawfully in this country? The question to ask yourself, they already committed an offence against our laws by crossing the borders or being an over-stay visa. Then to obtain a job in the U.S. other than criminal businesses not bothering to verify their hired work verification, they had to use fraudulent Social Security cards, drivers licenses, birth certificates or some other form of ID—isn’t this a FELONY by definition?

Rep. John Duncan (R-Tenn.) is the latest cosponsored of House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith’s Legal Workforce Act (H.R.2885). The bill would require 100% of businesses to begin using E-Verify for all new hires within 2 years and require all federal, state, and local governments to check new hires and existing employees within 6 months to name a few statuary laws. Although hundreds of companies now are using the E-Verification hiring process, it must be made permanent. Currently it needs heavy action by all patriotic Americans. This can be done by the voter contacting Washington 202-224-3121 and giving your name, address to the aid and insisting your representative in the Senate-House uphold the law and co-sponsor H.R. 2885. Don’t hesitate! Perform it now, as not only are thousands of jobs vanishing overseas, because of the stalemate in Congress, but people are still crossing borders or staying after their visa is expired. Don’t be fooled by the lies from the Leftists, who are concentrating with their lies that moderates are seeking all ethnic majorities be deported. Don’t listen to their lies that illegal aliens pay for their own financial support, that the majority pay taxes. Most states are in a terrible mess, specifically Sanctuary states like California, Nevada and flooded with foreigners, feeding of the crippled welfare system.

Rep. Duncan represents Tennessee’s 2nd Congressional District and is serving his 13th term in Congress. He has earned a career A-plus grade and has also cosponsored Rep. Steve King’s bill to end Birthright Citizenship and Rep. Marsha Blackburn’s bill to strengthen interior enforcement. Pregnant Mothers from other countries in numbers unsustainable of 300 thousand annually, which taxpayers are forced to outlay. NumbersUSA website—is another way to communicate your demand for following the 1986 Immigration laws, be obliged to be held accountable for illegal hiring. Only the TEA PARTY, the American people of all party denominations, from every walk of life, wants an end to this growing deficit crisis. Illegal Immigration is fiscally hurting Arizona, Alabama, South Carolina, Utah, Indiana and all the rest of the 50 states, which are being drained in billions of dollars in federal non-funded mandates. Unless millions of patriotic Americans start communicating their fears, the worst is just across the horizon. We must build the—REAL—double fencing across the lower United States. We must enact the MANDATORY ‘Legal Workforce Act” Now.

Farmers and those giant agricultural factories, who hire illegal alien workers, pay nothing for the children’s schooling or families’ health care. YOU DO!

While I’d like to believe that Newt is telling the truth, I agree with others that its just a bunch of showing off to get some Hispanic votes. Obama did the same thing, and look at his “Secure Communities”!!! That turned out AWESOME. To date only a fraction of the “bad guys” have been caught, while the vast majority are moms and dads taking kids to school or having the audacity to get pulled over for “the light being off over the license plate”. Newt doesn’t seem to be much better, and I wouldn’t be surprised that if once he did get in the White House he’d go back on every single promise he ever made.

Neither of the parties is for any group, especially not a group like the Hispanics. (Hi, Nativism…) They’re for their own power and greed and corruption. They might have good people on either side, but unfortunately the scum rise to the top and ruin it for everyone. 

And Rubén Estrada—- THANK YOU. Yes, there are a lot of illegal Eastern immigrants here, who are very under the radar (I’m sure it has nothing whatsoever to do with perceptions about race, not at all…). And although I’m in love with languages (I speak 3 so far) I have to agree- we need interpreters and documents in many languages when it comes to hospitals, the law, and schools. Just as I get angry when someone asks to speak to a “real Hispanic” (I have an accent in Spanish, since its my 2nd language) I also get angry when I see doctors letting 8 year-olds interpret for their parents. Call me crazy, but I’m more than half sure that an 8 year old probably doesn’t know anything about prescribing medicine.

As far as legality goes, less people would come illegally if the way to becoming legal weren’t such a massively difficult undertaking, especially for those who don’t have the $5,000 plus to shell out just to get everything going for permanent residency.

This has nothing to do with the article, but it is CRITICAL that the faithful are aware.

The Atlantic Wire has just posted the following headline;
Gay Rights Foreign Aid Incentive Could Also Aid Obama Campaign

To me, this is just incredulous that we would consider giving foreign aid on this basis at a time when we are not even standing on our own two feet as a country. WHAT IS THIS PRESIDENT THINKING!?!?!

And then we hear grumblings from him of tax increases? To support what????

I just do not understand what really drives our current President. Does anyone else?

Newt might be a good man, but his stand on the illegal aliens sucks!  He says you can’t deport 12-20 million illegal aliens.  How’s this for an idea?  Make entering this country illegally a felony.  Make the fine $2500 plus one year in Federal prison.  Make this the same on overstayed VISAs.  If drugs are involved, triple the fine. Then, apply this to all the illegal aliens in this country now.  Leave or if you get caught, the fine will apply to them.  Maybe, just maybe, this will take the place of a fence that is costly and doesn’t seem to work all that well. It may even cut down on the cost of deporting these illegal aliens. The other thing is this birthright citizenship.  We MUST know through Congress or the Supreme Court if indeed a child born to an illegal alien is a U.S. citizen.  I say they are not.  If not, then, how do we REVOKE the birth certificates already issued.  Boy, can you see the problems with this illegal immigration?  Maybe Congress should allow states to enforce immigration laws, or at least a few of them.  When is enough going to be enough?  Tell me!

http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html

Fighting for your jobs in 50 States, by using MANDATORY E-Verify?

The numbers of politicians enthusiastic by passing ‘THE LEGAL WORKFORCE ACT’ is rising, and now only needs 32 more of sponsors for its introduction to the House floor. This would have exceptional ramifications for the ailing job market, in rejecting illegal aliens and replacing them with citizens and legal diverse workers.  The numbers of politicians enthusiastic of passing ‘THE LEGAL WORKFORCE ACT’ is rising, and now only needs 32 more of sponsors for its introduction to the House floor. This would have exceptional ramifications for the ailing job market, in rejecting illegal aliens and replacing them with citizens and legal decisive workers. This is not a pogrom against any race or nationality; it’s not a witch hunt to stop Blacks, Hispanics, Europeans, and Pacific Islanders, Asian or other persons. It’s about keeping to the law, the ‘Rule of Law’ like aiding and abetting millions of illegal alien from every hemisphere across the world.

It’s about corruption in Washington from both parties to hire cheap labor and exploit it; it’s also about millions of votes in future years, to undermine fair and equal electoral laws. You have seen the outcome after the original amnesty of rampant fraud by business owners, who will be held liable for not implementing form I-9 and not running a electronic E-Verify process. E-Verify will become—MANDATORY—for every business and if not complying face harsh penalties. Hundreds of thousands at the Mandatory E-Verify enactment would promote rapid self-deportation, adding more jobs for Americans. Ice raids have shown in large companies, illegal migrants and immigrants fleeing and making room for different racial backgrounds lining up for those jobs.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich would have American taxpayers keep supporting the millions still unlawfully in this country? The question to ask yourself, they already committed an offense against our laws by crossing the borders or being an over-stay visa. Then to obtain a job in the U.S. other than criminal businesses not bothering to verify their hired work verification, they had to use fraudulent Social Security cards, drivers licenses, birth certificates or some other form of ID—isn’t this a FELONY by definition? THEN WHY IS IT NOT A FELONY? IF YOU STOLE SOMEBODIES ID OR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER AND GOT CAUGHT, YOU WOULD BE IN JAIL.

Farmers and those giant agricultural factories, who hire illegal alien workers, pay nothing for the children’s schooling or families’ health care. YOU DO!


Rep. John Duncan (R-Tenn.) is the latest cosponsored of House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith’s Legal Workforce Act (H.R.2885). The bill would require 100% of businesses to begin using E-Verify for all new hires within 2 years and require all federal, state, and local governments to check new hires and existing employees within 6 months to name a few statuary laws. Although hundreds of companies now are using the E-Verification hiring process, it must be made permanent. Currently it needs heavy action by all patriotic Americans. This can be done by the voter contacting Washington 202-224-3121 and giving your name, address to the aid and insisting your representative in the Senate-House uphold the law and co-sponsor H.R. 2885. E-Verify will also be beneficial in National Security?  Don’t hesitate! Perform it now, as not only are thousands of jobs vanishing overseas, because of the stalemate in Congress, but people are still crossing borders or staying after their visa is expired. Don’t be fooled by the lies from the Leftists, who are concentrating with their lies that moderates are seeking all ethnic majorities be deported. Don’t listen to their lies that illegal aliens pay for their own financial support, that the majority pay taxes. Most states are in a terrible mess, specifically Sanctuary states like California, Nevada and flooded with foreigners, feeding of the crippled welfare system.

Rep. Duncan represents Tennessee’s 2nd Congressional District and is serving his 13th term in Congress. He has earned a career A-plus grade and has also cosponsored Rep. Steve King’s bill to end Birthright Citizenship and Rep. Marsha Blackburn’s bill to strengthen interior enforcement. Pregnant Mothers from other countries in numbers unsustainable of 300 thousand annually, which taxpayers are forced to outlay. NumbersUSA website—is another way to communicate your demand for following the 1986 Immigration laws, be obliged to be held accountable for illegal hiring. Only the TEA PARTY, the American people of all party denominations, from every walk of life, wants an end to this growing deficit crisis. Illegal Immigration is fiscally hurting Arizona, Alabama, South Carolina, Utah, Indiana and all the rest of the 50 states, which are being drained in billions of dollars in federal non-funded mandates. Unless millions of patriotic Americans start communicating their fears, the worst is just across the horizon. We must build the—REAL—double fencing across the lower United States. We must enact the MANDATORY ‘Legal Workforce Act” Now.

I hear there is a reduction of illegal aliens entering illegally, but what about the real estimate of 20 million plus already squatting here. They say it costs 120 million dollars to capture illegal aliens, so have we already the cost to states and the federal government revenue payout to subsidize illegal immigrants? How about a nice round figure of 100 Billion dollars? Most don’t pay taxes; those who come here quickly find a way to screw the welfare safety net. The most expensive portion of the social welfare system is Mothers with babies, known by the term ‘Anchor Babies’ or ‘Foothold Babies’ who immediately get public aid and states carry the costs. It is a very clever, intentional act to smuggle a unborn baby into America by jet or through the mostly unguarded regions of the border.

Kevin, just a guess but honesty, humanity and justice.  Your milage may vary.

Hitler was right on jobs and how to get out of an ecoomic depression…following liberal Catholic principles of today [e.g. a la Mr Shea],wasn’ it OK for Catholics then to vote Hitler in as Chancellor?  and for the moment ignoring 4000 subhumans who will be murdered today, many of them out of pure racism, isn’t it not only OK but morally imperative that Catholics ...like those who voted for Hitler, vote for Obama?

How is Newt Gingrich on the abortion question.  He used to be for abortion exceptions, as it’s OK to abort a baby in cases of rape, incest and “life of the mother”.  This is of course not the Catholic position on abortion, which has allows for no abortion.  Just wondering if Newt has changed his tune since becoming Catholic.  If not, his views are in direct opposition of the teaching of the Catholic Church.

I am very active with the Spanish community at our parish— many of whom are not yet citizens. They are wonderful people who are contributing greatly to our society not to mention their tremendouos piety.  One of the few disagreements I have with the GOP is its staunch attitude to immigration. Newts resonse in the debate mentioned made my stand up and say to my wife —“it is about time someone in the party had the guts to say what is reasonable and right about this issue”. This problem is not going to go away. It needs to addressed and Newt is not afraid to do it—even if it costs him the nomination which it obviously has not done so yet.  George W. Bush proposed the same program as Newt and the Dems and press fried him for it and he pulled the proposal. I believe Newt will follow up and solve the problem.  Wow, what a breath of fresh air—a politician not afraid to say what is right.

“However, if this stipulation requires going back to an immigrant’s original home and starting the process there, that is asking too much.”

What a two-faced group of hypocrits!!!—the catholic church/bishops supporting ILLEGAL Lawbreakers that are Hurting the American people, taxpayers, voters & America in EVERY way…But they can’t be bothered to protect us, OH NO, they’re looking out for those new ILLEGALS to fill their pews & coffers…REALLY did the Priest Sexual Abuse of Small Children NOT Teach ya’ll Anything????—-If You are going to back a side shouldn’t it be the MORAL side ... ya know the one on the Side of the LAW???????—-ILLEGAL Immigration is Amoral…Get a Clue, then get a CONSCIOUS

As a person who has lived for 35 years in Arizona adjacent to the Mexican border and have been married to a Mexican-American (2nd generationo) for almost that long, I like Newt’s stance.  I have never understood why we can’t emplement a decent guest worker program which would protect immigrants as well as US citizens.  And simplify the immigration process.  And it is indecent to deport children, who, through no fault of their own, have grown up here without citizenship.  And what about the expense and logistics of deporting possible 15 million people?  Secure the borders so no one else comes illegally, but treat those who just want to come and work with decency.  It will benefit all of us.  And it is the right thing to do.

Am I the only one in this country that suspects Newt’s support for illegal immigrants is based on their common religion? Is this really a power play in demographics by the catholic church? Or am I being too conspiratorial?

Post a Comment

By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.

Name:

Email:

Write your comment:

Please enter the word you see in the image below:

     

Notify me of follow-up comments.