P
Pup7
Guest
Who’s going to pay to track down the relatives?
Loving parents don’t use children as pawns to gain illegal access to a sovereign nation.
You cross illegally, you assume the risk.
- Status
Loving parents don’t use children as pawns to gain illegal access to a sovereign nation.
You cross illegally, you assume the risk.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You are right, I dropped a negative somewhere. What I should have said was:LeafByNiggle:
Read this again, it makes no sense. I’m not clear on what you are now saying.
Personally, take the woman and child in the Time photo, I don’t think she was a loving parent for abandoning most of her kids with her husband, but at least they were safe and secure at home. Then she dragged one child across mexico and illegally over the border. A very dangerous and high risk journey. If they hadn’t been caught, she would have struggled further as she hunted around the US for illegal work, child in tow. That child seems far better off with HHS/CPS. Be honest, she used one child as her “get out of jail free” ticket - definitely not a loving parent. She never even told her husband she was leaving.
We don’t take children away from parents who are loving parents with no problems. We don’t take children away unless they are no longer providing the children the loving care they need.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You asked what happens when a citizen is detained.LeafByNiggle:
Who’s going to pay to track down the relatives?
I disagree with your characterization of what most of these refugees are doing.
Yes, they do. That does not mean we have to make those risks even worse.
P
Pup7
Guest
We’re not making them worse.
These policies aren’t new. They’ve been around for ages.
So you’re saying that a sovereign nation should change its laws as to not inconvenience or impose upon those who choose to break them?
They aren’t refugees or asylees until legally declared as such. I also didn’t say "most’ of them were doing anything. Some clearly are, as shown in the Time article.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Taking their children away from them is making things worse for them. Sure it was done in the past. That does not make it untrue that taking away their children is making things worse for them.LeafByNiggle:
We’re not making them worse.
Close, but not quite. A nation should change its laws so as not to impose unjust punishments on the most vulnerable an needy of the world - a population I will remind you that the Lord especially hears. In my Church we often sing the hymn The Lord hears the cry of the poor:
The Lord does not wait for our legal declaration of their status before listening to their cry.
I know there are some bad apples in there. But that does not excuse us when we treat them all as potential rapists and drug dealers.
Last edited:
P
Pup7
Guest
The Lord is not a governed nation. You’re comparing apples to oranges.
You break a law, there are consequences. You won’t change my mind, and I’m completely fine should this be on my list on Judgment Day of Things Pup7 Must Answer For. I don’t believe in illegal immigration, I don’t believe in putting noncitizen’s concerns ahead of citizens/LPRs, and that will never change with me. I’ve navigated the system. I’ve got the t-shirt. Most of these folks statistically speaking are attempting to game the system - they’re not qualified for asylee status, as previous deportation stats show.
The Lord expects the nation to govern itself. As do I as a taxpayer.
Break a law and there are consequences. Illegal immigration is not a joke.
P
pnewton
Guest
We house men, women and children together in evacuation shelters all the time, but only because it is a short term accommodation. That is why the courts do allow this for up to 20 days.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Are you saying it would then be okay to do so for longer than 20 days as the long term solution?Pup7:
We house men, women and children together in evacuation shelters all the time, but only because it is a short term accommodation. That is why the courts do allow this for up to 20 days.
blackforest
Well-known member
Unlike ICE, the foster care system prioritizes family ties and family reunification first.
Fittingly, that’s why these asylees came to the united states - family ties - and that’s how our policies have a time-honored tradition of prioritizing who is granted status as asylees and refugees. This means that border patrol could make an effort to get a hold of families and loved ones already living in the U.S. where the children could stay. The other option is, yes, to allow them to stay with their parents as they would in an evacuation facility.
But then, border agents are paramilitary forces, not social workers, and lack adequate training. They’re in over their heads.
And just in case you were planning on it, don’t complain about the tax money that it takes to do this. Supplying alternative detainment and foster care for these children is sucking plenty out of our paychecks as it is.
Last edited:
blackforest
Well-known member
S
Sarcelle
Guest
Why the laughter?
They’re at home and cared for by their father and not dragged across Mexico by their mother and vulnerable to predators.
They’re at home and cared for by their father and not dragged across Mexico by their mother and vulnerable to predators.
Last edited:
blackforest
Well-known member
I do this cool think where I highlight what I write. Then you can click on the highlighted letters and go to a link to read the supporting evidence. In case you missed it, here it is. Everything you need to know about human rights in El Salvador|Amnesty International | Amnesty International
El Salvador is dangerous.
El Salvador is dangerous.
Last edited:
T
Theo520
Guest
That in and of itself doesn’t qualify them for free visas.
Many places in the US are also quite dangerous. Heck, my small home town was on 60 min twice because it was soo horrible.
Why don’t you put your effort into political activism in El Salvador, if that is your thing.
S
semper_catholicus
Guest
I wonder how many immigrants Bernie Sanders has taken in to his home. I wouldn’t imagine many.
blackforest
Well-known member
Oh good grief. Please don’t. That’s like saying you’re not allowed to be pro-life unless you adopt unwanted children.
Last edited:
blackforest
Well-known member
OK, OK. I won’t argue. The U.S. is exactly like El Salvador for violence and human rights violations.
Last edited:
H
help1
Guest
Yeah, Bernie isn’t exactly the guy you want to be taking moral advice from…but maybe he has a point. I think we should try to look at the issues with open hearts and think about what Jesus would say.
T
Theo520
Guest
Like I said,OK, OK. I won’t argue. The U.S. is exactly like El Salvador for violence and human rights violations.
If El Salvador is your thing, go down there and fix them.
or campaign for a UN resolution to overthrow their elected govt
As of now, their economic migrants don’t qualify as refugees per UN guidance.
S
semper_catholicus
Guest
It would be a lot easier for him to take immigrants in than most people considering his house. That’s why I said what I said.
blackforest
Well-known member
It’s still a fallacious argument.
- Status