O
OraLabora
Guest
No he’s not. He’s pro-birth. Pro-life means so much more than just being against abortion.
Last edited:
Who will you be supporting in the U.S. presidential election with our Catholic values in mind?
- Thread starter Willing_Spirit
- Start date
- Status
M
Metis1
Guest
Trump was Pro-Choice all his adult life until he decided to run on the Republican ticket. Some may call what he did, and continues to do, “pandering”.
We saw how much he really cares for children when he had so many of them put into cages in order to “send a message”, which he repeated numerous times. The CBP warned Trump that they would have to increase the numbers of judges and lawyers in order to handle the increased load, but they didn’t-- until it became a nightmare for them when pictures were secretly snuck out and made public.
And Trump’s pandering continues on and on and on, which is what autocrats historically have done.
We saw how much he really cares for children when he had so many of them put into cages in order to “send a message”, which he repeated numerous times. The CBP warned Trump that they would have to increase the numbers of judges and lawyers in order to handle the increased load, but they didn’t-- until it became a nightmare for them when pictures were secretly snuck out and made public.
And Trump’s pandering continues on and on and on, which is what autocrats historically have done.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Much like the Dems were for a wall until Trump became president ,now they are against it.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I agree with that. Although she is a distant 6th place now, Amy Klobuchar is poised to take on the role of the moderate if Biden stumbles seriously. Amy has rejected the extreme medicare for all plans and can work with Republicans.
Last edited:
D
dvdjs
Guest
Pleased avoid equivocation. There are differences between the various border security proposals that have been advanced by various administrations. And surely you agree that it was a poor idea to spend money on a wall that - notwithstanding trump’s hype about its impenetrability - was breached with cheap tools available at Home Depot.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
That’s your response to whatever doesn’t meet your narrative equivocation.Pot calling kettle black me thinks
D
dvdjs
Guest
I am open to discussion.
Why not show us the favored and disfavored border security proposals. and we’ll go over them point by point to see the similarities and differences.
Last edited:
P
pnewton
Guest
That is your opinion. It is true, though ignored, that other good Catholics seen this, and Trump, in a vastly different light. You vote your Catholic vote, and let other vote their proper, moral Catholic vote.
P
pnewton
Guest
That is a straw man. No one has made such a ridiculous claim. As to other claims as to why people cannot vote for Trump in good conscience, that is between them and God. No person gets to kick Jesus off his throne to make such judgment.
M
Maximus1
Guest
As this testimony is revealed we see curuption and this nations institutions being dismantled. What is alarming is how Americans have decided they don’t care. You can’t have any policy debate if the state is dismantled.
farronwolf
New member
You don’t have to focus on border security.Jeanne_S:
I an open to discussion.
Why not show us the favored and disfavored border security proposals. and we’ll go over them point by point to see the similarities and differences.
If you penalize the employers 10% of their gross revenue for each person they hire who is ineligible to work in this country you solve a giant problem.
We simply need to enhance the verification. The employee provides their name, dob, ssn, and mothers maiden name. Employer checks it out and gets a go or no go. If they hire the person without the go status, and are caught 10% of companies gross revenue penalty.
Take away the job, you limit the number of illegal crossing from the get go.
Next the immigration laws need to be addressed. Sensible legislation needs to be passed. If folks are here without proper documentation and they aren’t criminals, and have a history of working and paying their taxes for X number of years, they need to be given a path towards citizenship.
The gov. is good about issuing ITIN’s so they people who are here and working can paid their taxes, but the people with ITIN’s aren’t getting credit for the SS and medicare they are paying in. It just goes into the big pile. For the gov. to issue ITIN’s, collect the taxes but not give the payer any future benefit is immoral in my opinion.
It is much more complicated then building a wall and saying, this will fix it.
M
Metis1
Guest
The Dems are not against having a wall, and none of the current candidates for pres are for open borders. The CBP has made it clear that they really want more guards at the border crossings and also upgraded equipment, but $ doesn’t grow on trees.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Uhhh no thanks,I’m not interested in a loooonnnngggg drawn out back and forth with you.
Last edited:
E
Elf01
Guest
Agreed.
Agreed.
This is more complex and seems unjust to people who have tried to immigrate legally. Although I do accept that deporting them is not a feasible solution.
I would be more inclined to consider a path to legal residency, but they could not become citizens. It seems a decent compromise. Not ideal, but I guess it’s like the frozen embryos there is no good solution. It’s just a mess that needs to be sorted out in the fairest way possible.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
There is a problem with this, though. Employers cannot challenge facially valid ID. All illegals have pretty good fake ID. E-verify doesn’t fix that. The only way employers can “check” is to arrange with ICE for a complicit raid now and then. ICE might do it if the employer sends copies of ID for ICE to check out for fraud. If enough are fraudulent, then ICE will agree to a raid.
So basically there is nothing employers can actually do to avoid hiring illegal workers, almost without exception.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
It might be more so than people think. I have never known an illegal who didn’t return to the home country frequently. It’s the ease of re-entry that creates the endless residence here. And that ease of re-entry is due to the inability of most law enforcement to actually verify identification.
E
Elf01
Guest
I doubt they go as a huge group.
Is there a reason that law couldn’t be changed?
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Never said they did. But they don’t have to if people are intercepted crossing the border coming back.
I doubt it can be changed. Democrats, who want to change the country’s demographics, thinking Hispanics will be Democrats forever, will oppose it as “discriminatory”. Some Repub, as well as Dem business people will not want to lose the cheap labor.
As usual, the American working public is the victim of rules like this, and few care about them.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
This sounds unbelievable enough that I think some sort of support is needed for that claim. Who is to judge what is “facially valid”? I can’t imagine a law based on such a subjective determination.
farronwolf
New member
You fix the system to where it actually validates the information.
Name, SSN, DOB and mothers maiden name, just like the SSA does.
Just because the current system isn’t strong enough doesn’t mean you can’t fix it.
Name, SSN, DOB and mothers maiden name, just like the SSA does.
Just because the current system isn’t strong enough doesn’t mean you can’t fix it.
- Status