• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Separation of families at the border

shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Revoltingest said:
The problem I see here is that Trump is poor at negotiation.
His abusive & combative style has inspired the same in them.

Christians dominate the voting public & government.
We see this evidenced here on RF with all the complaining
that the country should be more like Jesus.

Such are a great many Christians.
Click to expand...
Sadly, your last sentence is true.

Efforts to reform immigration laws have been going on for 30 years, at least. Every bill to do so in both houses that has come to the floor has failed.

Democrats or Republicans, it doesn´t make any difference, have torpedoed the bills, for different political reasons.

So Trump is no different as Presidents go on this matter. They all have failed the country and especially the taxpayer, and they all are responsible.
 
fantome profane

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
Revoltingest said:
Are you arguing that the existence of wasteful government
acts in one area justifies justify them in another?
Click to expand...
I would not say providing children in U.S. custody with the basic essentials (food, clean water, beds, basic hygiene) as being wasteful.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
fantome profane said:
I would not say providing children in U.S. custody with the basic essentials (food, clean water, beds, basic hygiene) as being wasteful.
Click to expand...
To encourage illegal entry by those who require immediate care is indeed wasteful.
If we just stopped illegal entry before it happened, it would be cost effective.
1) It would curb the incentive to cross illegally.
2) #1 would reduce such traffic, & related enforcement costs.

What say we open the borders to all, but onto busses north to Canuckistan?
They're always carping about our lack of generosity, & bragging ot theirs.
We'll pay for the busses (complete with bathrooms, vending machines, & wi fi).
It's win win!
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
fantome profane said:
Probably the billionth time this has been said, but once again, seeking asylum is not illegal.
Click to expand...
I've never claimed that to seek asylum is illegal.
But entering the country illegally is illegal.
And this is done by a great many not seeking asylum at all.
The system should be designed to discourage rather than encourage it.
I see no point in discussing this with someone who refuses to comprehend that.
Click to expand...
If you'd read more carefully, you wouldn't have posted that sentence.
Moreover, if you'd read the whole post, you'd have found things to discuss.
But directly addressing challenging issues can be off-putting.
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
fantome profane said:
It is not. You may think it is, or think it should be, but it is not. An asylum seeker has the same rights regardless of how they enter the country.
Click to expand...
That is dead wrong. They have the right to an asylum hearing, but they have no legal right to enter the country except at ports of entry. They will be deported when their bid for asylum fails, and most that have a hearing are deported.

Due to some screwy laws, they get certain privileges that a Mexican citizen does not get, but they do not have carte blanche to just walk across the border and carry on.

The Border Patrol takes them into custody and detains them, why ?
 
Rational Agnostic

Rational Agnostic

Well-Known Member
The Reverend Bob said:
They aren't illegal aliens, they are asylum seekers and refugees who have committed no crime.
Click to expand...

Wrong. They have committed a crime, according to the current law, and when they cross the border, they are aware that they are putting their families at risk by breaking the law. Personally, I think the law should be changed so that they are not treated as criminals simply for trying to make a better life for their families, but as the law is written now, they are criminals. BTW, the USA can only support so many people. We don't have the resources to let everyone in. I wish we did, but we don't. Because of this, there should be at least some penalty for crossing the border illegally, although families should not be separated IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fantome profane

fantome profane

Anti-Woke = Anti-Justice
Premium Member
shmogie said:
They will be deported when their bid for asylum fails, and most that have a hearing are deported.
Click to expand...
Sure, but it makes no difference how they entered the country. It makes no difference if they walk up to a port of entry, or sneak across in the dead of night disguised as a cactus. In both cases they will be taken into custody. And in both cases they can apply for asylum. And the way the entered has no bearing on their case.
 
T

Terry Sampson

Well-Known Member
Screenshot_2019-07-26 Let them eat cake - Google Search.png
 
S

suncowiam

Well-Known Member
We Never Know said:
1. A hungry person who illegally takes food is breaking the law.

2. A homeless man who illegally stays in a vacant house is breaking the law.

3. A person who crosses into the U.S. illegally is breaking the law.

All are breaking the law. Why do you feel we should overlook 3 and not 1 and 2?
Click to expand...

In other countries, it's against the law for females to drive. Does it make it right?

Laws tend to be black and white, however, life isn't.

A dying person that is dying from hunger when caught stealing probably should be viewed differently. The person would value his life over a law. The question remains is if he would steal if his life was dependent on it.

Basing your argument purely on technical aspects is failing to see the ethical and moral perspective of the entire situation.
 
Ellen Brown

Ellen Brown

Well-Known Member
Americans ignorantly think that this is about America and Hispanics. This whole range of issues is driven by world overpopulation, and climatic change. I think we will eventually see famine and a human die off to below 1-2 billion population. We may fight a terrifying war in the process. Will humans go to the stars during this? I doubt that we are smart enough. Read my book when I finish.
 
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
The Reverend Bob said:
Those are not the issues being discussed. The issues being discussed is the border crisis. Different issues. Maybe you should come back after your mental fog lifts
Click to expand...
Once again, negative comments about a poster. Since I started the thread, I am telling you his questions are perfectly valid.

Does a persons circumstances create an excuse for them breaking the law, so that they haven´t broken the Law ?

That is where he was going, you didn´t see it.
 
The Reverend Bob

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
We Never Know said:
The issues being discussed is breaking the law. Coming here illegally is breaking the law. Not to mention endangerment of the welfare of minors by dragging the children along that dangerous journey.
Click to expand...
Asylum seekers and refugees are not coming here illegally. How many times does this have to be ****ing repeated before a bunch right-wing mental cripples get it? Do we have to translate it into i-tard for some to understand? Do we have to spell it out in chicken nuggets so the helmet-headed window lickers can learn a basic concept?
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The Reverend Bob said:
Asylum seekers and refugees are not coming here illegally. How many times does this have to be ****ing repeated before a bunch right-wing mental cripples get it? Do we have to translate it into i-tard for some to understand? Do we have to spell it out in chicken nuggets so the helmet-headed window lickers can learn a basic concept?
Click to expand...
Ya know....sometimes posters mistakenly presume
it's the other guy who doesn't understand.
It's worth considering.
Being less abusive would also serve you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top