Bill O’Reilly wants to meet with Pope Francis so that he can explain all the ways the pope is wrong about immigration – and, at the same time, make clear that O’Reilly’s own anti-immigrant “Kate’s Law” would be right up Jesus’ alley.
O’Reilly’s words of advice for the pope came at about 2:30 into his Talking Points commentary that included other subjects such as attacking President Obama for not going to Justice Antonin Scalia’s funeral. The pope lecture was so egotistical and arrogant, that only O’Reilly’s own words can do the matter justice.
So here’s a transcript (with some help from Media Matters):
O’REILLY: Finally, the pope. I would very much like to speak with him. And if I can arrange that, I would like to bring the family of Kate Steinle with me.
I would explain to Francis the facts about the murder of the 32-year-old Kate. I would tell him that because the U.S. government will not, will not secure the southern border of the United States, a Mexican career criminal was able to illegally enter America six times after being deported five times. For decades, this man sold narcotics on the streets. And was ultimately protected by the corrupt city and county of San Francisco, which allowed the illegal-alien criminal freedom. The result? He shot and killed Kate. Then after all of that, I would point out to the pope that the U.S. Congress was incapable of passing Kate's law, giving authorities more power to control illegal aliens who commit aggravated felonies in this country.
Finally, I would suggest to Pope Francis, that millions of Americans have been harmed, economically, by our immigration system which desperately needs reform. I think I could persuade the pope that providing protection and enforcing settled law is certainly not un-Christian. What is against the tenets of Jesus is to allow chaos that harms innocent people, like Kate Steinle and her family.
What I believe might infuriate Jesus is politicians who are sworn to uphold laws, ignoring their oaths in pursuit of power and votes. When human beings are being harmed, Christians have a sacred duty to try to stop that harm. Yes, there must be compassion for the poor and oppressed. And no one is better in promoting that than Pope Francis. But social order and justice must be incorporated into compassionate public policy. If not, harm will follow which, in America, it has.
O'Reilly forgot to mention that in his fervor to get Kate's Law passed, he threatened senators who didn't go along with him.
Far be it from me to argue about Christ's teaching but I think I can state definitively that Kate’s Law is exactly the kind of thing that Pope Francis was denouncing.
Watch O'Reilly argue that he knows more about how to apply Christianity than the pope, below, from the February 22 The O’Reilly Factor.
Maybe he would like to tell the pope that he, O’Reilly, doesn’t understand the facts of the case at all?
For starters, Jesus didn’t hold down a job. Seriously—read the Gospels. They all completely ignore his life between the ages of twelve (when Mary and Joseph find him in the Temple debating a group of rabbis) to about 30 (when he meets John the Baptist and starts his itinerant ministry). There’s nothing canonical describing any sort of income. He just walked around Palestine, preaching and feeding the masses and healing people. FOR FREE!!!!! (Maybe Billdo’s all in favor of “migrants” who work for nothing. He just gets upset when they start thinking their lives are worth something more than just “warm body.”)
Then, there is that whole ministry. Hanging around all sorts of people, many of whom were among the dregs of society but treating them as if they were kings and high priests. Traveling around in a group, but living off handouts with no steady source of income (like a whole bunch of Blanche DuBoises, “relying on the kindness of strangers”). The whole ministry relied on “loving your fellow man as yourself” and “turning the other cheek” and a lot less about a strict obedience to authority.
But, much like Reagan, I suppose Billdo has his own idea of who Jesus really was (well, at least as far as any evidence exists).
