Anyone hoping for a really controversial papal visit (and some were) would have to be disappointed last week. Pope Benedict XVI didn’t publicly decry the Iraqi war and he praised American generosity, vitality and faith. Still, he wasn’t afraid to tackle some difficult topics.

He addressed the problem of pedophile priests, chiding US bishops for mishandling the problem but also laying some of the blame on society at large: “What does it mean to speak of child protection when pornography and violence can be viewed in so many homes through media widely available today?”

And while he may not have taken George Bush to the “papal woodshed” for the Iraqi war, Pope Benedict did urge “patient diplomacy to resolve conflicts” and promised before he came to privately discuss immigration and the war.

The pope’s immigrant comments raised the ire of anti-immigration Rep. Tom Tancredo. Pope Benedict told U.S. Bishops to help immigrants:

I want to encourage you and your communities to continue to welcome the immigrants who join your ranks today, to share their joys and hopes, to support them in their sorrows and trials, and to help them flourish in their new home. This, indeed, is what your fellow countrymen have done for generations. From the beginning, they have opened their doors to the tired, the poor, the “huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

Tancredo said the pope was inappropriately engaging in American politics and speculated that the pope was promoting immigration to prop up the Church’s waning numbers. Another immigrant activist echoed Tancredo, and CNN’s Lou Dobbs was miffed, too. National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez told Tancredo to calm down, noting that the pope made no such specific policy statements. Wall Street Journal editors agreed: “You know the restrictionists have gone head-first into the fever swamps when they denounce a Christian religious leader for sounding like a Christian.”

The pope also made an attempt to diffuse recent tension with the Jewish community after he reinstated a prayer for Jewish conversion in the Latin Mass. Pope Benedict XVI met privately with Jewish leaders and became the first pope to visit a Jewish synagogue in the United States.

In an intriguing SFGate column, Kathleen Parker says she may not agree with the pope, but she takes an comfort in seeing him take a stand:

Even for non-Catholics like me, there’s something comforting about a stubborn pope in a world of moral relativity. Like a strong father, he ignores his children’s pleas for leniency, knowing that his rules, though tough, serve a higher purpose.

Hollywood is uncannily good at accidentally making films with similar plot elements at the same time; witness both the two Truman Capote biopics and the two magician movies (The Illusionist and The Prestige) in nearly simultaneous production during 2006. Sometimes, however, the clustering is more purposeful, if unintentional – the spate of recent Iraq films illustrate the long-identified principle that when politics are in the picture, the movies tend to bunch up, too.

Now that illegal immigration has resurfaced as a hot topic, filmmakers are taking notice. Two recent films have gingerly approached the topic, choosing to at least partially diffuse the inflammatory nature of the material by focusing on individual stories that, if not based on real stories, certainly could be.

La Misma Luna (Under the Same Moon), an undeniable tear-jerker, is the story of Rosario (Kate del Castillo), a Mexican woman living illegally in Los Angeles and working several housekeeping jobs to earn enough money to apply for citizenship and bring her son, Carlitos (Adrian Alonso), into the United States. Carlitos is tired of waiting for her and decides to take matters into his own hands. From here, it turns into a kind of Homeward Bound remake, as Carlitos crosses the country, runs from the INS, warms the heart of a gruff itinerant laborer (Eugenio Derbez), and looks for his mother. Rosario, in the meantime, struggles with her loneliness and her desire to provide for Carlitos’ future.

The film is equal parts Spanish and English (Ugly Betty’s America Ferrara has a small role as an American college student) and it’s obviously heartfelt. Unfortunately, it’s also sometimes cloyingly sentimental, with a supporting cast of not-quite-three-dimensional characters (the oblivious rich boss, the benevolent café owner, the conniving relatives, the lovable grandmother), and the conclusion calls for suspension of disbelief – not necessarily a bad thing, but if a filmmaker’s goal is to portray the plight of a particular group of people, the last thing they need is for the audience to leave feeling that they’ve seen a fairy story.

The Visitor moves off the west coast and explores a different kind of tale. Directed by Thomas McCarthy (whose earlier work includes The Station Agent), the story mostly avoids the syrupy-ness trap and bucks the ironic bent of the current independent film scene with an earnest, distinctly un-supercilious tale. Walter (Richard Jenkins) is a crotchety college professor living a sterile self-absorbed in suburban Connecticut. Upon arriving in New York City for a conference, he finds a young couple living in his apartment: Tarek (Haaz Sleiman), a Syrian-born drummer, and his Senegalese girlfriend Zainab (Danai Gurira), who sells handmade jewelry in a street market. Initially withdrawn, Walter warms to the couple – victims of a real estate scam - as Tarek shares his love of drumming with him. But when Tarek is arrested for allegedly jumping a subway turnstile, the tale turns to heartbreak, and Tarek’s mother (a stunning Hiam Abbass) comes to New York to search for her son.

Jenkins, who hasn’t done much work as a leading man, turns in a wonderfully nuanced and understated performance; his growth from cold reticence to passionate involvement happens in small gestures and looks. The rest of the cast throws themselves into their roles with aplomb and heart, and the tale’s melancholy conclusion proves more poignant than the happy ending of La Misma Luna.

In contrast to the recent proliferation of war movies, these films also approach a similarly politically divisive topic with some joy and humanity, making them far more delightful to the audience. Instead of painting in broad strokes, they tell intensely individual, humanizing stories that put a face to something you may only read about in the newspaper. Whatever your political beliefs, films such as these are a thoughtful reminder that nobody is simply a statistic.

“Immigration questions are questions dealing with God’s children,” Marlin Jensen, a Mormon Church leader, said in a speech at Westminster College. Jensen said the church has addressed Utah’s overwhelmingly Mormon Legislature, asking government officials to “slow down, step back and carefully study and assess the implications and human costs involved” in immigration reform.

During the current legislative session, lawmakers face several bills that propose to limit privileges and punish illegal immigrants Though a mantra of the Mormon church states, “The Church’s mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ, not to elect politicians,” Jensen said the issues surrounding immigration reform are more than political but moral and ethical, as well. He also said he did not speak only for himself or the Quorum of Seventy, a group of Mormon leaders who serve as church emissaries. The First Presidency, the top three leaders of the Mormon Church, commissioned him.

Other churches are also voicing support for laws protecting illegal immigrants. A movement called Catholic Campaigning for Immigration Reform: Justice for Immigrants asks for laws that promise “family reunification, just and effective border control, a temporary worker program, restoration of due process protection and a path to legalization and citizenship for those already in the US.” The Southern Baptist General Convention has issued statements in support of reform and shown support of Hispanic evangelical groups such as the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Council.

On July 12, 2006, 150 faith leaders and representatives delivered the “Interfaith Statement in Support of Comprehensive Immigration Reform.” The statement quotes passages that encourage love for “the strangers among you” from the Bible, the Qu’ran and the Hindu Upanishads.

On the other side, however, groups such as Biblical Family Advocates, a Christian pro-family ministry, say the uncontrolled presence of immigrants promotes disobedience to God and lawlessness.

John McCain rankled conservatives Sunday when the straight-talking senator seemed to evade a question about his choice of Hispanic outreach director. McCain, whose immigration views often exacerbate conservatives’ reservations about him, told the Florida crowd he has “nothing to do with” any of the views of that director, Juan Hernández, a former Vicente Fox official who ran the Office for Mexicans Abroad. Turns out, though, those views include outspokenly advocating the “free flow”of people across an open U.S.-Mexico border.

McCain has been trying to toughen up his views on immigration reform, to segue from his McCain-Kennedy bill to an “I will secure our borders, I will not allow anyone to come here illegally, I will not allow anyone to receive Social Security or any other benefits” stance (which were his words on Sunday). But McCain’s conservative-credentials problem exposes a larger one for the Republican nominee in November: how to appeal to the key Hispanic voter bloc without compromising support from the rest of the law-and-order base.

It’s partly because of McCain-Kennedy, in fact, that the senator scored an endorsement Friday from Florida Sen. Mel Martínez, the former RNC chairman. And for Hernández, his role Stateside (as a native Texan) is actually a high-profile one in conservative evangelical circles. As his bio at the Reform Institute, where he is a senior fellow, reads, “he is a leading figure in the Latino evangelical community and partners frequently with We Care America to address the humanitarian and faith-based issues involved in the debate over immigration reform.” He’s also part of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, led by the influential Samuel Rodríguez, a pro-Bush evangelical who supports liberalized immigration laws. More than a third of the country’s 41 million Hispanics identify themselves as “born-again” or “evangelical,” which is more than double the number a decade ago and comprises a formidable voting bloc.

McCain is aware that the border question could be his undoing with the GOP base. (He indelicately invoked God and damnation to describe “the [expletive] fence” in this Vanity Fair profile.) But even critics acknowledge his contrarian immigration stance may best re-attract that key Hispanic voter bloc, a record-setting third of which President Bush’s 2004 outreach efforts managed to cull. (Roughly two-thirds of Hispanic evangelicals backed Bush; people hotly dispute the data, but agree that it represents vast improvement from 2000.)

Strategists in Texas and California prophesied that their newly majority-minority states would be good for Republicans, as the Republican Party could only benefit from a growing number of Hispanics, who tend to be socially conservative. But then immigration reform hit, and Republicans came down as they thought they ought to on a law-and-order issue. Democrats carried the Hispanic vote nationwide in the 2006 midterms by 47 points.

A Christianity Today piece last week again broached the far-flung consequences of this defection (or disaffection). Vocalizing the philosophy of a growing number of Republicans, strategist-turned-pundit Dick Morris wrote last year in a Hill op-ed that it’s “time Republicans awakened to the political opportunities of Evangelical Hispanic conversions and got with the program.” He advocated “embrac[ing] the basic tenets of immigration reform to win the inevitably increasing proportion of the U.S. vote cast by Hispanics,” whose turnout, while typically low, is the most likely to continue its upward arc, and could already make or break the 2008 candidate in a state like Florida.

Frank Pastore, the former major league pitcher who’s now a radio talk show host in L.A., wrote an open letter to Mike Huckabee on Monday, stating, “I can say, along with millions of Americans, that you’ve won our hearts. Now, close the deal and win our minds and thereby our votes by answering the main questions your critics have raised against you becoming our next president.”

Today, Huckabee responds to Pastore’s questions on spending, the “Fair Tax,” education, national security, illegal immigration, a ban on smoking, and the environment. Did Huck hit one out, or did he swing and miss?

In his Townhall.com column today, our colleague Marvin Olasky also posed some questions on conservatism to the GOP presidential hopeful.

Church of England Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester, created quite a stir over the weekend by observing in a Sunday Telegraph oped that Islamic extremists had created de facto no-go zones in the UK, nearly identical to the banlieues of France that have been the battleground in the serial car-burning intifadas in recent years. Bishop Nazir-Ali (himself of Pakistani background) states:

Alongside these developments, there has been a worldwide resurgence of the ideology of Islamic extremism. One of the results of this has been to further alienate the young from the nation in which they were growing up and also to turn already separate communities into “no-go” areas where adherence to this ideology has become a mark of acceptability.

Those of a different faith or race may find it difficult to live or work there because of hostility to them. In many ways, this is but the other side of the coin to far-Right intimidation. Attempts have been made to impose an “Islamic” character on certain areas, for example, by insisting on artificial amplification for the Adhan, the call to prayer.

The Sunday Telegraph dedicated a separate article to the Bishop’s comment, and the BBC discusses the political fallout and carries the obligatory denunciations of the Bishop’s comments as “Islamophobia…” (more…)

When Alabama state trooper Darryl Zuchelli stopped a van going 18 mph over the speed limit, he busted not only speeders but also two people from India who had overstayed their visas. Zuchelli is one of 56 Alabama troopers working with Immigration and Customs Enforcement to crack down on illegal immigration. Stateline.org reports:

Now the partnership known as the 287 (g) program is skyrocketing in popularity - 34 state and local law enforcement agencies in 15 states are on board and another 77 have applied. The program offers one of the few ways states and localities can help crack down on illegal immigration, a federal duty.   But deputizing local officers to help enforce federal immigration laws draws critics who question whether it could hamper police officers’ ability to do their core duties, because it could scare off immigrants from reporting crime and could lead to racial profiling.

The program makes sense to me as a way to extend immigration enforcement beyond the borders and into the interior. What do you think of it?

Pressure from the congressional Hispanic Caucus has compelled House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to kill part of a bill that prevents workers asked to use English on the job from suing their employers for workplace discrimination. The Salvation Army is one employer already embroiled in such a lawsuit from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The amendment — an add-on sponsored by Tennessee Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander to the Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill — passed in the Senate 75-19. The House voted 218-186 earlier this month to instruct its conference negotiators (who would meet with their Senate counterparts to finalize the bill) to approve the amendment.

Now at Pelosi’s bidding — and following a heated exchange on the Senate floor involving Democratic infighting and finger jabbing that John Fund recounts here — that meeting of Senate and House negotiators has been postponed indefinitely. The House Hispanic Caucus predictably told her it was rooted in “bigotry and prejudice” and threatened to kill a larger tax bill over the issue. This comes less than a week after the fallout from Hillary Clinton’s flip-flop on, and New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s support of, driver’s licenses for illegal aliens.

“Thousands of small businesses in America will have to hire lawyers, go before a federal agency and argue why there is some special reason for their employees to be required to speak English on the job,” an aide to Sen. Alexander told WoW. “Being an American is based on . . . learning American history and learning our common language, English, so we can talk to one each other, live together and do business with one another.”

It is actually the EEOC’s rules, and not The Salvation Army’s English-only policy, that have shaky legal footing. The former were rejected by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 1993 (Garcia v. Spun Steak), while The Salvation Army defeated a lawsuit against its policy in 2003 (Cosme v. The Salvation Army). Moreover, a requirement for U.S. citizenship is proficiency in English.

Fund says the EEOC is undermining that: “The EEOC claimed the [The Salvation Army] had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not ‘relevant’ to job performance or safety. . . . Republicans have their political problems with Hispanics over some of their approaches to illegal immigration, but they may be nothing compared to the problems Democrats have if they continue to cave in to their anti-assimilation extremists.”

An aide to Pelosi, who spoke to WoW on background, downplayed the issue, saying this is partly because the appropriations bill will likely get subsumed by an omnibus bill later this year with other spending measures.