DiscussMormonism.com

https://www.thenation.com/wp-content/up ... cted-1.jpg

https://www.thenation.com/article/six-y ... socialflow

This is a picture of a document a six year old separated from her family in detention was required sign after being sexually assaulted. Everything implied by the document itself is appalling, but reading the signature makes it really hit home.

And, of course, this ugly period of American history was formally kicked off by demonizing Mexican immigrants as rapists, leading to a barbaric policy that actually got this young girl assaulted after already putting her in tortuous circumstances.

Let's see it:





Hey Ajax - are you pleased to see that the ICE agents are teaching this little child that she must assume her personal responsibility for not getting abused?

Of course, you're a Mormon aren't you? So you know this girl was born into a poor (Nicaraguan?) family because she was less valiant in the pre-existence, and was not therefore allocated to white optometrist parents.

Do some history learning. Abuse during these separations occurred prior to the current Administration. And this point is not your juvenile "whataboutism", but serves to dismiss your idiotic claim for "formally kicked off".

Also, given the fact that many of these separations are a means to determine if the child is actually with a parent/relative or is with a human trafficker. But that's cool, let's let children be exploited because you want to use ignorance to argue the exception over the rule, all in the name of a hair fire.
Thanks!

Can someone kindly explain to me how the preceding post is some kind of answer to the horrifying situation evidenced in the posted form?

Just so we are clear on "hits home"...30k pages didn't do the trick, it as the one page in an overtly bias and inflammatory article that suddenly got EA to care....caring from a distance...but caring...until the Monday headlines.

From the OP link:
Earlier this year, the ACLU released a report, based on 30,000 pages of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, that described hundreds of cases of abuse of immigrant children in US custody between 2009 and 2014. Customs and Border Protection issued a statement calling the report “unfounded and baseless.”

Chap wrote:Can someone kindly explain to me how the preceding post is some kind of answer to the horrifying situation evidenced in the posted form?

After you try to feebly explain how a child inappropriately touching another child qualifies as "horrifying".

subgenius wrote:Just so we are clear on "hits home"...30k pages didn't do the trick, it as the one page in an overtly bias and inflammatory article that suddenly got EAllusion to care....caring from a distance...but caring...until the Monday headlines.

From the opening post link:
Earlier this year, the ACLU released a report, based on 30,000 pages of documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, that described hundreds of cases of abuse of immigrant children in US custody between 2009 and 2014. Customs and Border Protection issued a statement calling the report “unfounded and baseless.”

Ah, here we go with the "What about Obama" idiocy.

These kids were torn away from their parents precisely because of a Trump policy which was so outrageous and horrible that he immediately was forced to rescind it. But the damage is already done, and hundreds of kids will likely never see their parents again as many have been deported without them.

The difference that should be obvious to anyone with a brain and a conscience is that under Trump's system, toddlers are appearing before judges by themselves and expected to answer questions anyone with a brain and a conscience knows that they cannot answer. And here we have a legal form expecting little children to understand what they're reading. Epitome of stupid, but par for the course in Trump's government.

subgenius wrote:

Chap wrote:Can someone kindly explain to me how the preceding post is some kind of answer to the horrifying situation evidenced in the posted form?

After you try to feebly explain how a child inappropriately touching another child qualifies as "horrifying".

Yeah, you look like someone who could be mistaken for a pedophile, so your lack of empathy is not surprising.

subgenius wrote:Do some history learning. Abuse during these separations occurred prior to the current Administration.

There were no "these separations," as she was separated under Trump specific policy, but yes, abuse occurs in immigrant detention and the potential for it is relatively high compared to healthier living arrangements. Of course, this argues in the opposite direction of what you want.

And this point is not your juvenile "whataboutism",...

Fantastic projection, there.

Also, given the fact that many of these separations are a means to determine if the child is actually with a parent/relative or is with a human trafficker.

And a lie to top it off.

subgenius wrote: ... explain how a child inappropriately touching another child qualifies as "horrifying".

For a start, the behaviour was classified as 'sexual abuse', and 'sexually inappropriate behaviour' which had been going on for a week. Your attempt to reduce it to 'touching' is noted.

Further, the 'child' so doing could have been any age up to 13:

... according to an official from the Department of Health and Human Services, a "tender age" child can be up to 13 years old.

"We have specialized facilities that are devoted to providing care for children with special needs and tender age children as we define as under 13 would fall into that category," Steve Wagner, HHS Acting Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families told reporters Tuesday.

The only action taken to prevent further abuse of this vulnerable little girl is to tell her to keep away from her abuser, and to be responsible for 'maintaining boundaries'. This is a child of 6, for goodness' sake, and they are trying to put the responsibility for her abuse back onto her. The other options. such as increased supervision or more clinical contact, or change of accommodation, are left unticked.

Nothing to see here, of course ...