Federal judge enjoins separation of migrant children

[LeafByNiggle]

Ecclesiastes:

You’re true colors are showing! What part of love your neighbor as yourself don’t you understand?

Wanted to add that I indeed understand the call to love my neighbor as myself. But nowhere does it say I’m expected to compromise the health and well being of my own family to do it.

That depends on the degree of compromise called for. There are reasonable compromises and their are unreasonable ones. In this case it appears that what you risk is a nebulous risk of loss that might not cost you anything at all, and certainly won’t cost you a lot. There comes a point when concern for ones own well-being borders on the absurd. If we gave in to every absurd fear anyone had about strangers, we would never welcome anyone. How would that be living out the Gospel message?

 

[mythbuster1]

Why don’t we house the families in Catholic parishes? They can have sanctuary on the parish grounds, but will be arrested if they leave.

 

[LilyM]

Are.those advocating the separation of children from adults aware that there are plenty of under 18s (or under 16s for that matter) who also traffick drugs, run with criminal gangs and commit all the various mischiefs that are so concerning them? Talk about trading one evil for another! And then compunding it with usually unnecessary severing of families…

 

[Pup7]

Short term is catch and release with tagging a possbiilty?

Historically they don’t return for processing. Tagging? You’re suggesting something analogous to ankle bracelets for criminals, I’m guessing.

Who’s going to pay for that, to include the manpower and equipment required for monitoring?

 

[Pup7]

That depends on the degree of compromise called for. There are reasonable compromises and their are unreasonable ones. In this case it appears that what you risk is a nebulous risk of loss that might not cost you anything at all, and certainly won’t cost you a lot. There comes a point when concern for ones own well-being borders on the absurd. If we gave in to every absurd fear anyone had about strangers, we would never welcome anyone. How would that be living out the Gospel message?

This has nothing to do with my concern for my well being. I’m not worried about my well being in the least.

This has to do with legality and looking out for one’s one citizens and legal residents over capitulating to demands from others.

Giving in to every request for assistance and leniency also benefits no one. Least of all the legal resident and citizen.

If one breaks the law, one must deal with the consequences.

If you don’t have viable solutions, you can’t condemn those who disagree with you.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

That depends on the degree of compromise called for. There are reasonable compromises and their are unreasonable ones. In this case it appears that what you risk is a nebulous risk of loss that might not cost you anything at all, and certainly won’t cost you a lot. There comes a point when concern for ones own well-being borders on the absurd. If we gave in to every absurd fear anyone had about strangers, we would never welcome anyone. How would that be living out the Gospel message?

This has nothing to do with my concern for my well being. I’m not worried about my well being in the least.

This has to do with legality and looking out for one’s one citizens and legal residents over capitulating to demands from others.

What about when those demands are from citizens, like me?

Giving in to every request for assistance and leniency also benefits no one.

This is a straw man since I have not suggested giving the assistance requested to everyone.

Least of all the legal resident and citizen.

Did you consider the benefit to the souls of the legal residents and citizens?

If one breaks the law, one must deal with the consequences.

If you don’t have viable solutions, you can’t condemn those who disagree with you.

I have some solutions you can consider and criticize if you choose:

1. Hire more immigration judges so their cases can be decided promptly making it unnecessary to incarcerate huge numbers at a time.
2. Prioritize young children over older children, so that under no circumstances are the very young taken from their parents.
3. Ask the families themselves if they have relatives they trust in the US who could take care of their kids while they await their hearing in custody. Having a kid stay with Grandma with the approval of Mama is a lot easier on the child than having an ICE agent rip the baby crying from his mother’s arms and having the baby sent to a total stranger in Ohio. No civilized nation on earth does that to parents for misdemeanors.
4. Invest in technological ways, such as GPS tracking bracelets, of temporarily releasing applicant families with supervision, perhaps daily by a “parole officer”, until their hearing. I think the reason so many skipped out on their hearings under “catch and release” is that the hearing dates were so far into the future. With prompt hearings and supervised release, families could be kept together without being incarcerated.
5. Open up more legal ports of entry and streamline the intake process so the legal course does not look so impossible.

 

[Pup7]

It’s amazing how people gripe about the budget and tax increases, yet every solution you propose would cost billions.

How are you going to pay for this without creating undue burden?

Tax and spend won’t cut this. They won’t solve the problem. It’s so sad that that’s always the solution, yet we have kids in this country who went to school last year with no heat in their schools and I didn’t see a lot of outrage about that. - or a lot of outrage about how they needed to funnel Federal funds to Baltimore to solve the problem. It hit the news and just as quickly seemed to disappear. The irony would be almost hilarious if it wasn’t so pitiful: let’s spend billions to make illegals legal but not fork out cash for our own. Seems typical if you ask me. And I’m done with it.

And there’s always Flint. That’s sort of disappeared from the news. Still a huge problem.

I’m also incredibly bored with “oh but it’s just a misdemeanor”. So’s possession of one marijuana cigarette in many states, and those people are still prosecuted and in most cases to the fullest extent of the law.

It’s a FEDERAL CRIME, folks. Get that? It’s a FEDERAL CRIME. This isn’t a speeding ticket. This is UNLAWFUL ENTRY INTO A COUNTRY.

Please, go enter somewhere else illegally and see how you’re handled.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

It’s amazing how people gripe about the budget and tax increases, yet every solution you propose would cost billions.

How are you going to pay for this without creating undue burden?

I don’t think my suggestions are any more expensive than what our President has proposed.

I’m also incredibly bored with “oh but it’s just a misdemeanor”. So’s possession of one marijuana cigarette in many states, and those people are still prosecuted and in most cases to the fullest extent of the law.

I don’t think taking children away from parents is appropriate for possession of one marijuana cigarette either.

 

[Pup7]

I don’t think taking children away from parents is appropriate for possession of one marijuana cigarette either.

So you’d be fine with kids staying in jail with their parents? Because that’s the alternative.

Oh wait - I bet you’d want family-friendly prisons built. Again. More money.

These people knew what they were doing when the came here. It’s illegal. There are consequences.

 

[reader]

Those parents who would force their children to accompany them during the commission of a crime do not deserve to have children.

 

[Ecclesiastes]

If the poor, uneducated, peasants of Ellis Island played an important role in making America great, why can’t history repeat itself with the asylum seekers from the south of the border?

 

[Monica83]

Well, for one, back when the Irish came we didn’t have bloated entitlement spending.

 

[Ecclesiastes]

Can you backup your claim that we have a bloated entitlement spending relative to that at the time of Ellis Island with a source?

 

[Ecclesiastes]

Even if we do have a bloated entitlement spending, is that an excuse to treat them like a deadly infection?

 

[Monica83]

Social programs in the United States - Wikipedia

"Not including Social Security and Medicare, Congress allocated almost $717 billion in federal funds in 2010 plus $210 billion was allocated in state funds ($927 billion total) for means tested welfare programs in the United States, of which half was for medical care and roughly 40% for cash, food and housing assistance. Some of these programs include funding for public schools, job training, SSI benefits and medicaid.[2] As of 2011, the public social spending-to-GDP ratio in the United States was below the OECDaverage.[3] Roughly half of this welfare assistance, or $462 billion went to families with children, most of which are headed by single parents.[4]

Total Social Security and Medicare expenditures in 2013 were $1.3 trillion, 8.4% of the $16.3 trillion GNP (2013) and 37% of the total Federal expenditure budget of $3.684 trillion.[5][6]"

37% of our Federal budget goes to social programs and believe me, if liberals had their way it would be a lot more than that. With 11 million undocumented immigrants and plenty more illegally entering, how much more entitlement spending do you think our country should take on? Do you think there will be (realistically speaking) continued prosperity here? That the rich who pay the burden won’t pick up and leave?

 

[Ecclesiastes]

OK, but it’s my understanding that relatively little of these funds go to first-generation immigrants. It also does not mean that such immigrants cannot be valuable to America.

 

[Monica83]

Yes, but their children get them access to our welfare programs.

 

[Ecclesiastes]

Ephesians 2:19-22
In Christ you are no longer aliens, but citizens like us
You are no longer aliens or foreign visitors: you are citizens like all the saints, and part of God’s household. You are part of a building that has the apostles and prophets for its foundations, and Christ Jesus himself for its main cornerstone. As every structure is aligned on him, all grow into one holy temple in the Lord; and you too, in him, are being built into a house where God lives, in the Spirit.

If Christ can be so loving to us, why can’t we be more loving towards asylum seekers? Maybe it would mean our making a sacrifice, but look at the sacrifice Christ made to save us!(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Pup7]

If Christ can be so loving to us, why can’t we be more loving towards asylum seekers?

I’m all for helping legitimate asylum seekers.

When they’re legitimately in need of asylum, and aren’t just claiming it.

 

[Ecclesiastes]

Where we legitimate in that we deserved the salvation that Christ had to suffer to make possible?