International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   USA Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Trump immigrant family separation policy (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=330118)

Squeegee Beckenheim 19th June 2018 02:16 AM

https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/s...95502379077637

Quote:

This just in from @davidbegnaud: Border Patrol has reached out to @cbsthismorning and said they are "very uncomfortable" with the use of the word cages. They say it's not inaccurate and added that they may be cages but people are not being treated like animals.

Squeegee Beckenheim 19th June 2018 02:19 AM

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...73908554805253

Quote:

Jeff Merkley tells CBS News that several of his Republican colleagues have told him that family separation is "terrible policy" but that they will only "call up and whisper to the admin ... they won't say it publicly."

Squeegee Beckenheim 19th June 2018 02:29 AM

Just a reminder: “There’s a special place in hell for people who prey on children" - Ivanka Trump

ponderingturtle 19th June 2018 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LSSBB (Post 12331584)
It's their fault we're separating them?

Exactly like it was the fault of those dirty jews on the St Louis trying to seek refuge here. We can't have illegal immigrants like that, good thing they wound up in the gas chambers.

ponderingturtle 19th June 2018 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theprestige (Post 12331587)
"legit asylum" begs the question.

Yep remember sending the jews back to germany was a high point in america after all. Pretending they were "legit asylum" there is no such thing because they have to be an illegal immigrant first after all.

Squeegee Beckenheim 19th June 2018 04:29 AM

So let me see, the Republican defences of this policy so far are:
  • It's a law put in place by the Democrats and they are powerless to do things any differently
  • It can only be repealed by an act of Congress and the Democrats are blocking any such move
  • It's the parents' fault, not the administration's
  • They are morally obliged to do things this way because the Bible says so
  • The camps are fine because, even though the children are being put in cages, they're not literally being treated like animals, so the word "cages" shouldn't be used
  • The camps are fine because any children seeming upset are just actors who have been coached and given scripts by Democrats
  • The camps are fine because it's just like being at summer camp
  • There actually is no policy that separates children from their parents

Did I miss any?

The Great Zaganza 19th June 2018 04:31 AM

You forgot:
  • they are all MS-13 animals, so where else but in cages are you supposed to keep them?

ponderingturtle 19th June 2018 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 12332031)
So let me see, the Republican defences of this policy so far are:
  • It's a law put in place by the Democrats and they are powerless to do things any differently
  • It can only be repealed by an act of Congress and the Democrats are blocking any such move
  • It's the parents' fault, not the administration's
  • They are morally obliged to do things this way because the Bible says so
  • The camps are fine because, even though the children are being put in cages, they're not literally being treated like animals, so the word "cages" shouldn't be used
  • The camps are fine because any children seeming upset are just actors who have been coached and given scripts by Democrats
  • The camps are fine because it's just like being at summer camp
  • There actually is no policy that separates children from their parents

Did I miss any?

The bible tells us to do this.

Foolmewunz 19th June 2018 04:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 12332031)
So let me see, the Republican defences of this policy so far are:
  • It's a law put in place by the Democrats and they are powerless to do things any differently
  • It can only be repealed by an act of Congress and the Democrats are blocking any such move
  • It's the parents' fault, not the administration's
  • They are morally obliged to do things this way because the Bible says so
  • The camps are fine because, even though the children are being put in cages, they're not literally being treated like animals, so the word "cages" shouldn't be used
  • The camps are fine because any children seeming upset are just actors who have been coached and given scripts by Democrats
  • The camps are fine because it's just like being at summer camp
  • There actually is no policy that separates children from their parents

Did I miss any?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza (Post 12332032)
You forgot:
  • they are all MS-13 animals, so where else but in cages are you supposed to keep them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 12332035)
The bible tells us to do this.


The logger reason: Ha ha because it upsets lol libruls.

Mumbles 19th June 2018 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Don (Post 12331963)
How is this even slightly surprising ?

The Trump Administration has worked hard to portray all Hispanics as dangerous gang-members and drug dealers and so those who are coming across the border (allegedly) illegally must be the most dangerous people in the world. This is necessary to protect the US because the DEMS have refused to allow Donald Trump to build his Mexico-funded wall.......:rolleyes:

It wasn't really much in the way of "hard work" - equating nonwhite people with crime and violence is pretty standard US white supremacism. Dolt 45 is roughly the same as electing George Zimmerman - same violent racism, same imagined grievances, same habit of abusing women. And naturally, he surrounded himself with other white suprematists like Sessions, Miller, and Bannon.

Giz 19th June 2018 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 12331971)

The U.N. official Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein?

The guy who supports a global blasphemy law?
(“global blasphemy ban under human rights law, in the Human Rights Council (known as the U.N. Commission on Human Rights until 2006) and the General Assembly. During both of Ambassador Zeid’s periods as Jordan’s ambassador to the U.N., Jordan voted in favor of these resolutions when they were introduced at the General Assembly. “
http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/26/...bassador-zeid/)

And is from Jordan? Who consider Palestinians born inside Jordan to be merely temporary residents?

And works at the U.N.? (Can’t even begin to list their humanitarian issues).

Yeah, count me as unimpressed by his interjection.

uke2se 19th June 2018 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giz (Post 12332172)
The U.N. official Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein?

The guy who supports a global blasphemy law?
(“global blasphemy ban under human rights law, in the Human Rights Council (known as the U.N. Commission on Human Rights until 2006) and the General Assembly. During both of Ambassador Zeid’s periods as Jordan’s ambassador to the U.N., Jordan voted in favor of these resolutions when they were introduced at the General Assembly. “
http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/26/...bassador-zeid/)

And is from Jordan? Who consider Palestinians born inside Jordan to be merely temporary residents?

And works at the U.N.? (Can’t even begin to list their humanitarian issues).

Yeah, count me as unimpressed by his interjection.

Perfect ad hominem.

Who would you be impressed by if he or she said rightfully that what the Trump administration is doing on the southern border is abuse?

ponderingturtle 19th June 2018 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giz (Post 12332172)
The U.N. official Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein?

The guy who supports a global blasphemy law?
(“global blasphemy ban under human rights law, in the Human Rights Council (known as the U.N. Commission on Human Rights until 2006) and the General Assembly. During both of Ambassador Zeid’s periods as Jordan’s ambassador to the U.N., Jordan voted in favor of these resolutions when they were introduced at the General Assembly. “
http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/26/...bassador-zeid/)

And is from Jordan? Who consider Palestinians born inside Jordan to be merely temporary residents?

And works at the U.N.? (Can’t even begin to list their humanitarian issues).

Yeah, count me as unimpressed by his interjection.

Got any actual comment of if this policy is child abuse, I am sure it will be easy to make a same list about the Colleen Kraft head of the american society of pediatrics.

uke2se 19th June 2018 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 12332185)
Got any actual comment of if this policy is child abuse, I am sure it will be easy to make a same list about the Colleen Kraft head of the american society of pediatrics.

Edited by jsfisher:  ...SNIP... Edited for compliance with Rule 12 of the Membership Agreement.

phiwum 19th June 2018 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12331912)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DgAatHsWsAA4FkP.jpg

What do people think of Ted Cruz's outlined bill proposal above? How do you feel it compares to the Feinstein bill being proposed?

On the surface, it seems reasonable. I'm not sure whether the fourteen day provision is a good one. It might require more time to evaluate a case fairly.

rdwight 19th June 2018 07:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Don (Post 12331926)
A couple of concerns spring immediately to mind:

Those judges will be appointed by the Trump Administration. The idea that they will be in any way impartial is laughable. It's authoritarianism 101, establish a series of kangaroo courts to apply your will while attempting to maintain a veneer of propriety.

Putting an arbitrary deadline on the processing of asylum claims will almost certainly result in decisions being rushed, particularly in the most critical of cases. Given that half of the judges will be recently appointed Trump Administration lackeys, it's removing the option of asylum altogether.

Most of your issues are not the point that is being pushed back against. Child separation due to current policy is what people want changed. This addresses that point.

I will concede that the 14 day deadline has to be changed to allow exceptions for cases that require it. Possibly extended to something reasonably quick but not overwhelming to the system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by phiwum (Post 12332188)
On the surface, it seems reasonable. I'm not sure whether the fourteen day provision is a good one. It might require more time to evaluate a case fairly.

Yea, I feel the same.

ponderingturtle 19th June 2018 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phiwum (Post 12332188)
On the surface, it seems reasonable. I'm not sure whether the fourteen day provision is a good one. It might require more time to evaluate a case fairly.

Who cares about that? It isn't like we grant asylum for anything anymore. We happily send people back to their deaths like they are jews on the MS St Louis.

rdwight 19th June 2018 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 12332031)
So let me see, the Republican defences of this policy so far are:
[list][*]It's a law put in place by the Democrats and they are powerless to do things any differently[*]It can only be repealed by an act of Congress and the Democrats are blocking any such move

I feel the system really needs a wake up call in regards to law passage and the specifics of what is written. I am tired of laws being written and then having the worst of their intent given discretion to be enforced by whatever administration currently resides in power. Congress does need to do their job, not concede points they don't believe will be enforced and let bad laws sit on the books until someone decides to start using them.

uke2se 19th June 2018 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12332207)
I feel the system really needs a wake up call in regards to law passage and the specifics of what is written. I am tired of laws being written and then having the worst of their intent given discretion to be enforced by whatever administration currently resides in power. Congress does need to do their job, not concede points they don't believe will be enforced and let bad laws sit on the books until someone decides to start using them.

Sure, but this is still the Trump administration's fault for electing to use cruel laws. Let's never ever forget that.

SuburbanTurkey 19th June 2018 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdwight (Post 12332207)
I feel the system really needs a wake up call in regards to law passage and the specifics of what is written. I am tired of laws being written and then having the worst of their intent given discretion to be enforced by whatever administration currently resides in power. Congress does need to do their job, not concede points they don't believe will be enforced and let bad laws sit on the books until someone decides to start using them.

I am also frustrated with the history of half-solutions in regards to the illegal immigration problem over the last few decades, but being deliberately cruel to highlight the dysfunction of the process is still amoral. I don't buy that excuse anyway. Trump is being cruel to immigrants because his base wants cruelty to immigrants.

eeyore1954 19th June 2018 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LSSBB (Post 12331584)
It's their fault we're separating them?

Yes.
Who tried to bring them into the country illegally?
I am not saying it is right policy.

uke2se 19th June 2018 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332222)
Yes.
Who tried to bring them into the country illegally?
I am not saying it is right policy.

No, you're just defending it.

ponderingturtle 19th June 2018 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332222)
Yes.
Who tried to bring them into the country illegally?
I am not saying it is right policy.

Yep like those illegal immigrants we sent to nazi gas chambers, if only they could have been bothered to go a legal route Ann Frank might still be alive!

But she got what criminals like her have coming!

eeyore1954 19th June 2018 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 12332035)
The bible tells us to do this.

That was a ridiculous comment but I suspect it was taken out of context.

ponderingturtle 19th June 2018 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332228)
That was a ridiculous comment but I suspect it was taken out of context.

And yet the daughter of a minister said it and the attorney general.

Upchurch 19th June 2018 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332222)
Yes.
Who tried to bring them into the country illegally?

That is absolutely mind-numbingly ridiculous. How long have people entered this country, even illegally, and we didn't separate children from their families?

This is not a matter of law or breaking it. This is a matter of policy, bad policy, and those who will defend it.

BobTheCoward 19th June 2018 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332222)
Yes.
Who tried to bring them into the country illegally?
I am not saying it is right policy.

It is not someone else's fault for the actions you choose to take.

eeyore1954 19th June 2018 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle (Post 12332226)
Yep like those illegal immigrants we sent to nazi gas chambers, if only they could have been bothered to go a legal route Ann Frank might still be alive!

But she got what criminals like her have coming!

Am I wrong or do families that come to the border to seek asylum not get separated but those got caught coming across the border do?

uke2se 19th June 2018 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332237)
Am I wrong or do families that come to the border to seek asylum not get separated but those got caught coming across the border do?

You are wrong. Asylum seekers are separated.

And that makes it worse, but it was pretty *********** bad to begin with.

WilliamSeger 19th June 2018 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giz (Post 12332172)
The U.N. official Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein?

The guy who supports a global blasphemy law?
(“global blasphemy ban under human rights law, in the Human Rights Council (known as the U.N. Commission on Human Rights until 2006) and the General Assembly. During both of Ambassador Zeid’s periods as Jordan’s ambassador to the U.N., Jordan voted in favor of these resolutions when they were introduced at the General Assembly. “
http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/06/26/...bassador-zeid/)

And is from Jordan? Who consider Palestinians born inside Jordan to be merely temporary residents?

And works at the U.N.? (Can’t even begin to list their humanitarian issues).

Yeah, count me as unimpressed by his interjection.

Nice example of Limbaugh Logic, but I think I'll count you as lacking your own moral compass.

Upchurch 19th June 2018 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332237)
Am I wrong or do families that come to the border to seek asylum not get separated but those got caught coming across the border do?

You are wrong. Sessions recently closed down on asylum seekers.

eeyore1954 19th June 2018 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Upchurch (Post 12332232)
That is absolutely mind-numbingly ridiculous. How long have people entered this country, even illegally, and we didn't separate children from their families?

This is not a matter of law or breaking it. This is a matter of policy, bad policy, and those who will defend it.

What have we done in the past? What should happen to someone who comes across the border illegally?

uke2se 19th June 2018 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332246)
What have we done in the past? What should happen to someone who comes across the border illegally?

They should be allowed to keep the family together, and if it is decided that they are to be deported, they should be deported as a family.

It's not rocket science. All that's needed is a teensy bit of empathy, which is why it seems like rocket science to conservatives.

Squeegee Beckenheim 19th June 2018 07:54 AM

The funny disconnect I've noticed is that posters here seem to be going the route of protesting that there's nothing wrong with this policy and how it's being enacted. The Republicans in power, however, are mostly going the route of saying that they have no choice and it's down to the Democrats that these children are being separated from their parents. This implies to me that the Republicans in power actually know that what they're doing is wrong*. If they truly thought it was laudable in the way that posters here are suggesting, you'd expect them to be proudly owning the policy as their own. But even Donald "execute drug dealers"/"take away their guns without due process"/"Mexicans are rapists" Trump has enough self-awareness to want to distance himself from it.

*Or, at least, that it's considered wrong by a majority of voters

eeyore1954 19th June 2018 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Upchurch (Post 12332244)
You are wrong. Sessions recently closed down on asylum seekers.

Did that article prove that people that come to the border and try to seek asylum are separated from their families. At a glance I did not see it. i did read that domestic abuse is not a valid excuse to seek asylum unless certain things can be shown.

rdwight 19th June 2018 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by uke2se (Post 12332217)
Sure, but this is still the Trump administration's fault for electing to use cruel laws. Let's never ever forget that.

Definitely. There is no passing the buck on who is enforcing bad policy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey (Post 12332219)
I am also frustrated with the history of half-solutions in regards to the illegal immigration problem over the last few decades, but being deliberately cruel to highlight the dysfunction of the process is still amoral. I don't buy that excuse anyway. Trump is being cruel to immigrants because his base wants cruelty to immigrants.

I also agree it is not to highlight bad policy, but you know what? It really should be *********** highlighted already. It is the beyond ridiculous that this happens time and time again where laws enforced as written are inhumane but no effort is made to have them changed until that enforcement is actually highlighted/started.

I will not make this into a blame Obama/Democrats when they had power thread and I don't want to change subjects but these things need to be fixed first in the creation of the law, and then if not by administrations that choose not to enforce them knowing it is bad policy.

Congress represents us. If enough are not willing to change laws of this nature, let alone write them specifically like this in the first place, then Americans are **** people. I know a lot are anyhow. But hopefully not enough for so much bad policy to be kept just to appease them.

uke2se 19th June 2018 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332253)
Did that article prove that people that come to the border and try to seek asylum are separated from their families. At a glance I did not see it. i did read that domestic abuse is not a valid excuse to seek asylum unless certain things can be shown.

Oh come off it!

Read the *********** newspapers if you don't believe us. It's not like we need to spoon feed you information. If you think this is a good policy to follow, just have the moral fortitude to come out and say so instead of weaseling around it.

Squeegee Beckenheim 19th June 2018 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eeyore1954 (Post 12332228)
That was a ridiculous comment but I suspect it was taken out of context.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/a...church-leaders

Quote:

Let me take an aside to discuss concerns raised by our church friends about separating families. Many of the criticisms raised in recent days are not fair or logical and some are contrary to law.

First- illegal entry into the United States is a crime—as it should be. Persons who violate the law of our nation are subject to prosecution. I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained them for the purpose of order.

Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves and protect the weak and lawful.

Our policies that can result in short term separation of families is not unusual or unjustified. American citizens that are jailed do not take their children to jail with them. And non-citizens who cross our borders unlawfully —between our ports of entry—with children are not an exception.

They are the ones who broke the law, they are the ones who endangered their own children on their trek. The United States on the other hand, goes to extraordinary lengths to protect them while the parents go through a short detention period.

Please note, Church friends, that if the adults go to one of our many ports of entry to claim asylum, they are not prosecuted and the family stays intact pending the legal process.

The problem is that it became well known that adults with children were not being prosecuted for unlawful entry and the numbers surged from 15,000 in 2013 to 75,000 four years later. That policy was a declaration of open borders for family units.

Importantly, children are far more at risk attempting entry in remote areas.

I have given the idea of immigration much thought and have considered the arguments of our Church leaders. I do not believe scripture or church history or reason condemns a secular nation state for having reasonable immigration laws. If we have them, then they should be enforced. A mere desire to benefit from entry to the nation does not justify illegal entry. And, there are of course adverse consequences to illegal actions.

Once again, let me state that this nation has perhaps the most generous laws in the world.

My request to these religious leaders who have criticized the carrying out of our laws to also speak up strongly to urge anyone who would come here to apply lawfully, to wait their turn, and not violate the law.

xjx388 19th June 2018 07:59 AM

Could congress fix this by drafting legislation that specifically forbids the separation of families? Like a line inserted into the law that makes border crossing a crime? If so, I'd like to see the Democrats draft such a bill in response to Trump's BS buck-passing to them.

There is absolutely no reason to separate families. It serves no just purpose. I do agree that the previous system of letting them in the country to wait for legal proceedings is flawed but this policy is exponentially worse. Detain the family together . . . what is so hard about that?

The Don 19th June 2018 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xjx388 (Post 12332262)
Could congress fix this by drafting legislation that specifically forbids the separation of families? Like a line inserted into the law that makes border crossing a crime? If so, I'd like to see the Democrats draft such a bill in response to Trump's BS buck-passing to them.

Why should the Democrats be his water carriers ?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-19, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.