So what should we personally do about parent/child separation?

[OneSheep]

WH phone was busy, You can email them at

Contact Us | The White House

 

[F_Marturana]

In a brief synopsis of 100 words or less, please explain how the visa system works, and how a person from mexico goes about getting a visa.

 

[HarryStotle]

Theo520:

Joyful_Song:

It is a grave sin plain and simple.

It’s a grave sin to leave them with their parents,
that’s why the 9th district ruled against it in 97.

I don’t look to the district courts for advice on what is sin. I look to the Church and our religious leaders. Now if you can find a bishop, priest, or even a deacon who says it is a sin to let good families keep their children…

Perhaps you can find a bishop, priest or deacon who is willing to stand at the border and vet families and their backgrounds to determine which are “good families” and which are fraudulently attempting to use the situation to enter the country?

At first blush we wouldn’t expect good families to attempt to illegally enter another country or enter under false pretenses.

On the other hand, at a time when the word “family” can be taken to mean virtually anything and include virtually anyone no matter their blood relationship, I suppose a couple of smugglers and trafficked children might loosely qualify as a “family.” The adjective “good” might then lose all meaning and importance. So would it always be a sin for an adult or three to be separated from the unrelated (to them) children who accompany them? Who are we to judge, I suppose.

Would you take your children and attempt to enter another country without proper documentation or by avoiding proper legal avenues?

I wouldn’t, but then I suppose I am to be counted as a deplorable merely for insisting that the ruling authority in each country has sovereignty over its territory provided it has the actual welfare of its own citizens as its objective and that the rule of law grounded in a sound moral ethics has been established as the principle of governance.

Actually, what I find deplorable are politicians who are actively willing to trade the well-being of those citizens to and for whom they are actually responsible, and replace that responsibility with some crippled ideology aimed at the “good” for some fictitious entity euphemistically called “humanity” or “peoplekind” as if the well-being of an ideation counts above the well-being of actual human beings.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Theo520:

Joyful_Song:

It is a grave sin plain and simple.

It’s a grave sin to leave them with their parents,
that’s why the 9th district ruled against it in 97.

I don’t look to the district courts for advice on what is sin. I look to the Church and our religious leaders. Now if you can find a bishop, priest, or even a deacon who says it is a sin to let good families keep their children…

Perhaps you can find a bishop, priest or deacon who is willing to stand at the border and vet families and their backgrounds to determine which are “good families” and which are fraudulently attempting to use the situation to enter the country?

As everyone should know by now, it is not the job of the clergy to propose or implement solutions to social problems. It is ours, based on the moral guidance they offer.

At first blush we wouldn’t expect good families to attempt to illegally enter another country or enter under false pretenses.

Under the existing circumstances, I would totally expect that. And crossing the border illegally is not entering under false pretenses. And if they deny the act afterwards, knowing that they would be thrown out if they admitted, it is totally understandable that they would do that.

On the other hand, at a time when the word “family” can be taken to mean virtually anything and include virtually anyone no matter their blood relationship

The vast majority are biological parents. That is a red herring.

Would you take your children and attempt to enter another country without proper documentation or by avoiding proper legal avenues?

If I were faced with their life situation, you bet I would!

Actually, what I find deplorable are politicians who are actively willing to trade the well-being of those citizens to and for whom they are actually responsible, and replace that responsibility with some crippled ideology aimed at the “good” for some fictitious entity euphemistically called “humanity” or “peoplekind” as if the well-being of an ideation counts above the well-being of actual human beings.

In Catholic social teaching, the concepts of “good” and “humanity” are not mere euphemisms, but are principles upon which our service to God is based.

 

[HarryStotle]

In a brief synopsis of 100 words or less, please explain how the visa system works, and how a person from mexico goes about getting a visa.

How about if the borders are completely sealed, then we work out the details with countries like Mexico to send bona fide humanitarian organizations with impeccable credentials to those countries to explain “how the visa system works” and assist those actually needing refuge or asylum to obtain it.

Perhaps because the will to actually solve the problem doesn’t exist on the part of those who benefit from the existence of the problem, it doesn’t mean workable solutions can’t be thought of, if there was a will to do so.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Well said!..

 

[exnihilo]

Actually, what I find deplorable are politicians who are actively willing to trade the well-being of those citizens to and for whom they are actually responsible, and replace that responsibility with some crippled ideology aimed at the “good” for some fictitious entity euphemistically called “humanity” or “peoplekind” as if the well-being of an ideation counts above the well-being of actual human beings.

Quislings are throughout Western governments. The politicians know what they are doing. They don’t believe the lies they tell.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Contact your Senators and your Representatives. Call their office, mail a letter, show up in person.

 

[Annie]

Actually, although the border is not sealed, we have a system like that. You need permission to enter through the many doors on the border. There are embassies and consulates in the countries from which the people are arriving to explain the rules and even to grant them permission to enter.

I have no idea what to do about the very long waiting periods, as that is a function of the fact that way more people want to move to the US than we accept each year.

 

[Annie]

Thanks for the reminder

 

[HarryStotle]

The vast majority are biological parents. That is a red herring.

Can you support that claim with actual data?

Wikipedia claims the following…

Between 2000 and 2002, approximately 135,000 children in Mexico were kidnapped, presumably for exploitation in prostitution, pornography, or illegal adoption trafficking. It is estimated that there are around 16,000 children engaged in prostitution in Mexico as of 2004.

Many unaccompanied children also make the crossing from Mexico to the U.S. Over 26,000 such children were apprehended at the U.S. border in the first half of 2016. Unaccompanied minors are sometimes sold into prostitution by the trafficker, and their families are falsely led to believe that they died during transit.

Let’s assume if 26 000 unaccompanied children came to the border in the first half of 2016, that approximately 52 000 came in all of 2016. That seems like a substantial number. If your claim that the VAST majority come with parents as family groupings, that would mean the numbers of illegal family groups would be very large indeed. Yet, according to the Wikipedia article on illegal immigration, “The United States government held just over 300,000 people in immigration detention in 2007 while deciding whether to deport them.”

So, assuming a figure of 300 000 illegals annually in all of the US and something like 52 000 of them are unaccompanied children from Mexico, I fail to see how a “vast majority” come with family or parents. Something like 1 of every 6 held in detention are unaccompanied children. Seems like a substantial number, no?

Perhaps my stats are off? Or your “vast majority” claim is inaccurate?

 

[Sarcelle]

I will not argue the fact the our immigration system badly needs reforming.

So if we should not separate children from their parents what is the alternative? Detain them alongside their parents? You will hear outraged comments about jailing innocent children. Either way, you will get outrage.

Any more suggestions?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

The vast majority are biological parents. That is a red herring.

Can you support that claim with actual data?

That’s what the the former head of Customs and Border Protection said in an interview yesterday, and he ought to know, having overseen the operation for three years.

Wikipedia claims the following…

Between 2000 and 2002, approximately 135,000 children in Mexico were kidnapped, presumably for exploitation in prostitution, pornography, or illegal adoption trafficking. It is estimated that there are around 16,000 children engaged in prostitution in Mexico as of 2004.

This data is not about asylum seekers, so it is a red herring.

Many unaccompanied children also make the crossing from Mexico to the U.S. Over 26,000 such children were apprehended at the U.S. border in the first half of 2016. Unaccompanied minors are sometimes sold into prostitution by the trafficker, and their families are falsely led to believe that they died during transit.

This data is about unaccompanied children, not families travelling together.

Let’s assume if 26 000 unaccompanied children came to the border in the first half of 2016, that approximately 52 000 came in all of 2016. That seems like a substantial number. If your claim that the VAST majority come with parents as family groupings…

Misrepresentation! I said that the vast majority of families are real families, and not traffickers in disguise.

 

[HarryStotle]

Misrepresentation! I said that the vast majority of families are real families, and not traffickers in disguise.

I see. So the “vast majority” of families are families?

Heck, I would have thought that 100% of families would be families.

The question, I would think, is: What proportion of those who purport to be family groups are actual family groups?

Have you got any real data on that?

 

[Cruciferi]

Any more suggestions?

They’ll bellyache until confronted with finding a permanent solution. They just want to virtue signal and feel better about themselves. Very few, if any, of these people would House the refugees themselves. If I were to camp on their lawn without permission, they would call the police on me. Yet, it’s a crime against humanity to deport these people!

 

[Sarcelle]

If these families are given a free pass to settle in the country because it would cruel to separate them or detain them as a family, you bet there would a lot more people with children coming to our borders. Whether or not these children are actually theirs is another story.

Why?

Because it has been proven that bringing a child or two with you … works.

Now letting people jump the queue ahead of people who are waiting legally to be issued visas would also be unjust. So why not go ahead and open up the borders.

I cynically think this is the real reason behind the outrage in the press.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Misrepresentation! I said that the vast majority of families are real families, and not traffickers in disguise.

I see. So the “vast majority” of families are families?

Heck, I would have thought that 100% of families would be families.

The question, I would think, is: What proportion of those who purport to be family groups are actual family groups?

Have you got any real data on that?

As I said, the former director of head of Customs and Border Protection answered that question. If you want to read the full interview, it is here.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

LeafByNiggle:

Misrepresentation! I said that the vast majority of families are real families, and not traffickers in disguise.

I see. So the “vast majority” of families are families?

Heck, I would have thought that 100% of families would be families.

The question, I would think, is: What proportion of those who purport to be family groups are actual family groups?

Have you got any real data on that?

As I said, the former director of head of Customs and Border Protection answered that question. If you want to read the full interview, it is here.

Actually, his words were…

Quite frankly, I think we’re giving a lot of credit to the smarts and the sophistication, if that is what is going on. These experienced Border Patrol agents, myself, having a long career in law enforcement, we never even began to detect that these young people, these families coming across were doing it for some nefarious purpose of being able to get into the country by using children.
I mean, it was very clear these are family units.

In clear terms, what he is saying is that “we” never even questioned the family ties, so “we” had no idea whether they were or were not actual families, “we” just assumed it.

Yup, he answered the question, all right, but in such a way as to put anyone who even questions the alternative possibilities into the position of having to prove otherwise.

So why wasn’t documentation a requirement?

He also makes the point that in the summer of 2014, 68 000 were unaccompanied children…

I saw them in the toughest of times taking care of, in the summer of 14, 68,000 unaccompanied children. And for them to be put in this position is unconscionable also.

I suppose that blows away your notion that the “vast majority” were children with their families.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

HarryStotle:

LeafByNiggle:

Misrepresentation! I said that the vast majority of families are real families, and not traffickers in disguise.

I see. So the “vast majority” of families are families?

Heck, I would have thought that 100% of families would be families.

The question, I would think, is: What proportion of those who purport to be family groups are actual family groups?

Have you got any real data on that?

As I said, the former director of head of Customs and Border Protection answered that question. If you want to read the full interview, it is here.

Actually, his words were…

Quite frankly, I think we’re giving a lot of credit to the smarts and the sophistication, if that is what is going on. These experienced Border Patrol agents, myself, having a long career in law enforcement, we never even began to detect that these young people, these families coming across were doing it for some nefarious purpose of being able to get into the country by using children.
I mean, it was very clear these are family units.

In clear terms, what he is saying is that “we” never even questioned the family ties, so “we” had no idea whether they were or were not actual families, “we” just assumed it.

Very imaginative reading, that! Thinking that the Customs and Border Protection would not be on the alert for questionable asylum seekers. Of course their stories were examined!

 

[HarryStotle]

Very imaginative reading, that! Thinking that the Customs and Border Protection would not be on the alert for questionable asylum seekers. Of course their stories were examined!

Of course they were. And absent any documentation, the “examination” was about as methodical as the open borders executive would have preferred it to be.