CARAVAN heading to The U.S.A ( POLL )


So nobody was living on that land first?

Whew! For a moment there I was worried that huge swaths of a certain ethnicity would get wiped out by genocide, smallpox, dishonest treaties, displacement . . . .

On this topic, I stand with Pope Francis, who would never lower himself to dehumanizing language like “migrant hordes.”


Undeveloped and unoccupied are not synonyms.

There are valid refugees that need help, like Asia in Pakistan. Economic migrants are not refugees.


So they didn’t “develop” it, to Western standards at least, thereby justifying the “migrant hordes” from Europe and subsequent genocide?

Asia is not a country.



She’s a person…


A last name would have helped. :slight_smile:

Nobody on CAF is qualified to determine whether or not these asylees are “worthy” of entry.


But they must obey the law.


People who apply for asylum are obeying the law.


This isn’t about asylum, nor is it about immigration. It is about a joint globalist/UN plan to normalize mass migration in order to erode national boundaries and sovereignty.

This “asylum” ruse is to emotionalize the issue to garner widespread support from those who, if they knew the ultimate end objectives, would never agree to the program.

It is about the wealthy super-oligarchs having open pathways to more power and wealth.


The fact that these individuals have gone to a location other than a designated port of entry appears to disqualify them as legitimate asylees, and subjects those responsible for transporting these individuals to a fine of $3000 each.

(a) It shall be the duty of every person, including the owners, masters, officers, and agents of vessels, aircraft, transportation lines, or international bridges or toll roads, other than transportation lines which may enter into a contract as provided in section 238 , bringing an alien to, or providing a means for an alien to come to, the United States (including an alien crewman whose case is not covered by section 254(a) ) to prevent the landing of such alien in the United States at a port of entry other than as designated by the Attorney General or at any time or place other than as designated by the immigration officers.

Any such person, owner, master, officer, or agent who fails to comply with the foregoing requirements shall be liable to a penalty to be imposed by the Attorney General of $3,000 for each such violation,…


I wanted to edit my post to cancel the link but i cannot edit it because the forum says that i have exceeded the maximum number of edits and i have to wait 16 hours… :frowning:
If a moderator deems it inappropriate despite my warning (which is why i wanted to cancel it, i shouldn’t have posted it in the first place) then please edit the post.


When the Democrats put as much energy into getting the interpreters and others who helped during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq over here, maybe I will then listen to them about letting vast numbers of unvetted migrants, refugees, and/or asylum-claimers in.

Doesn’t having a rule that all anyone who enters illegally has to do when caught to be able to stay is to claim asylum strike anyone as odd?


No. It’s about seeking asylum. Not a vast conspiracy theory.

A good number of them already do come over here on a special visa. I’ve worked with them personally in my parish’s refugee ministry. Are there some being denied admission?

The asylees currently arriving from Central America are only unvetted until government officials vet them.

So far, they’re staying in shelters in Tijuana. Has anyone other than Breitbart claimed that they’ve “entered illegally?”


Apparently only 3,200 of an estimated 40-50,000 have been able to get the SIV, according to this 2016 article

Since I referenced the law, I thought it was clear that I was talking about the legal situation in general rather than the particular situation of those in the caravan.


Ugh. Unfortunately, these hurdles routinely plague refugees and asylees. I’ve met families who had officials demand marriage licenses and other documents from cultures that don’t even issue them.

It’s not a partisan issue but a bureaucratic one, although yes, it would be wonderful to see some bipartisan reform take place.

It was unclear, given the specific topic of the thread, but thank you for clarifying. Speaking generally, I prefer allowing people to apply for asylum regardless of where they enter. Trump recently passed a law, however, requiring specific ports of entry. This will inevitably overwhelm our already broken immigration system.


People from Honduras have to apply to Mexico [not the USA].

Fill out the paperwork, get the medical exam, get the police clearances, take a number, wait your turn.


Then crying “Asylum!” becomes a get in free card.

It really astounds me that so many Americans think of people from less developed nations as innocent and naive and really really good, like 4-year-olds.

If people in the US don’t think that word gets around in Latin America as to how to scam the system, then it is the Americans who are being innocent and naive.


How so? We will either have the same number applying for asylum, but all in one place and without the necessity of our going out and finding them, or we will have fewer applying for asylum, which would reduce the load.


Speculating that people have the worst possible motives and intentions is called cynicism and runs contrary to Catholic teaching on charity. Charity isn’t naivete, but it does give people a simple chance to apply for asylum, a legal process that is hopefully (but not lately) conducted fairly.


Assuming all people, including those who do objectively good things, have the worst possible motives is cynicism.

Noticing that people respond to incentives is not.


I notice your article is from 4 years ago.

The murder rate in Honduras, according to the government whom some people don’t trust, has been declining since its height 6 years ago.

So why were Hondurans not leaving Honduras in 1912? Why now?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit