Trump was warned beforhand about Children separated

[_Xenophon]

Absolutely -- which is why the vast majority of them will be fined (and/or jailed), and eventually deported. They will also face more harsh fines and/or jail time should they choose to be a repeat offender.

Their responsibility for their actions though doesn’t necessitate the objectionable practice of separating their children from them, and placing their children in what is more-often-than-not, jail-like settings. It also doesn’t necessitate the reprehensible abuses that many of the children have suffered (I highly recommend perusing just a handful of the filings, MARs, affidavits, etc. from the various lawsuits that have been filed by victims; many of whom abided by the law as it is currently established).

This is especially true given the alternatives that our government has at its disposal. These alternatives are highly effective (according to statistics from ICE), and have a 99%+ rate of kept ICE check-ins and court appearances. Not only are they effective, and much more humane, but they are also significantly less expensive.

Very well put dismantling of ajax's line of thinking that will, I suspect, fall on deaf ears.

[_Water Dog]

lol

silly liberals

[_Jersey Girl]

Do the childrens parents bear any responsibility for bringing their children into a country illegally?

Can you guess who typed this quote?

Opposing illegal immigration is no different than anyone who doesn't give a substantial amount of money to every beggar he meets on the street.

Previously, I assigned responsibilty to parents who knowingly tried to enter the country illegally. That was until I considered that they were seeking asylum and also that they hadn't been apprised of Sessions' May warning.

The system, if you will, is being manipulated, ajax. Children are coming in accompanied, then separated from their parents and labeled as unaccompanied.

Does that seem ethical to you?

[_canpakes]

lol

silly liberals

viewtopic.php?p=1134678#p1134678

There you go.

Geez, it’s too bad that conservatives need this sort of thing to get a hard-on.

[_Bach]

Children are coming in accompanied, then separated from their parents and labeled as unaccompanied.

Does that seem ethical to you?

I’ve always noticed how [deleted] always flip flops for convenience on this board without any focus on the issue:

“Why do you think they are separated in the first place! For the protection of every child!!!”

Trojan Horses come in all cruel ways.

So hard to cure ignorance!

[_subgenius]

The convenience of liberal compassion is currently the best platform that Democrats have for 2018...#bluewave.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatod ... p/13333909

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/pptmcpr.cfm

[_Some Schmo]

Geez, it’s too bad that conservatives need this sort of thing to get a hard-on.

Do you ever wonder why Drumpf's base finds so much pleasure in "liberal tears?" Do they somehow imagine it's liberals' fault their life sucks?

This is why I can't help but think most of them just aren't that bright. They keep voting for the same morons and wonder why their lives continue to suck. Some of them will even brag about wide GOP control in state and local governments, and still whine about Democrats. WTF? Are the Democrats so powerful they can dictate legislation as a minority? (FFS, the way some of them talk, you'd think Hillary was president now).

Such thoughtless people. They simply listen to what Fox News tells them and regurgitate it like brainless parrots.

[_ajax18]

Previously, I assigned responsibilty to parents who knowingly tried to enter the country illegally. That was until I considered that they were seeking asylum and also that they hadn't been apprised of Sessions' May warning.

I don't really understand the difference between seeking asylum and just entering the country illegally. Do you just say, "I'm seeking asylum," therefore you can't deport me? It just seems like another way to get your foot in the door and get around existing immigration law.

The system, if you will, is being manipulated, ajax. Children are coming in accompanied, then separated from their parents and labeled as unaccompanied.

Does that seem ethical to you?

None of it seems ethical to me. But I don't agree that these people have a right to be in the country in the first place.

[_canpakes]

Previously, I assigned responsibilty to parents who knowingly tried to enter the country illegally. That was until I considered that they were seeking asylum and also that they hadn't been apprised of Sessions' May warning.

I don't really understand the difference between seeking asylum and just entering the country illegally. Do you just say, "I'm seeking asylum," therefore you can't deport me? It just seems like another way to get your foot in the door and get around existing immigration law.

I’m not so sure that what you are describing is ‘getting around’ existing immigration law as opposed to actually being the process itself. In other words, you are describing the typical and accepted method of applying for asylum.

From the USCIS website:

“If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States. To apply for Asylum, file a Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal, within one year of your arrival to the United States. There is no fee to apply for asylum.”

[_canpakes]

Do you ever wonder why Drumpf's base finds so much pleasure in "liberal tears?" Do they somehow imagine it's liberals' fault their life sucks?

Exactly. What a way to prove Obama right after all of these years, about being bitter. These are folks whose sole source of enjoyment at times seems rooted in and dependent upon denying other folks something or in trying to get under someone else’s skin. What a way to live one’s life, right? It certainly wouldn’t be the legacy that I’d want to leave behind.

In another thread, we’ve got one of our wingnut regulars (I’ll let you guess who, but the name is reminiscent of a Jaredite transportation device) characterizing the Administration’s appointment of judges that might be more prone to turn down hearing cases about harassment or discrimination, as ‘#winning’. How does one rationalize that internally, while simultaneously trumpeting how supposedly moral and righteous they are? These are damaged people, and they don’t want to realize what the real source of their ‘problems’ are. That would demand too much logic and self-reflection, apparently.