US immigration breaking up families

[Rio Cana]

On local tv and on US news they have been talking about the outrage being cause by a US immigration rule being put into affect which is separating kids from there adult parents who have entered the US illegally. They say nothing in the law says families have to be separated. So thousands of kids, yes including babies, have been separated from there parents. Many of the kids have been separated thousands of miles from there parents. Chances are some of the kids will be lost in the system. Some news sources have talked about human trafficking about the possibility of human trafficking.

The government spokesman says its the law which some say is a lame excuse. News sources say this action is a ploy to try to force congress to give money for that border wall. So what do you think. It seems that is what is being done. The government wants congress to give the money for the wall and then they will stop separating families.

On our local tv they recommended that people from our island (who are American citizens but look Latin) should carry there passaports if visiting the US. They also mentioned because of what is happening that the US cannot criticize other nations for doing the same thing.

In a poll, 67% of US citizens are against this separating families. 23% are for it. Three former first ladies and the current first lady said that they do not support the separating of kids from families.

Chances are this could curtail illegal families from going into the US. It will also cause Russia/China/EU. to gain more friends in Latin America.

[Petrasylvania]

In addition to being assholes, the Donnie Administration is shooting itself in the foot as the children separated from their families count as unaccompanied minors and thus have to be admitted.

[Trumptonium1]

Good stuff.

Shame for the kids but they can blame the US constitution for that when they grow up, for somehow making them American by being born on a certain side of the border. Any civilised country would deport all of them, although I presume the parents still have a degree of autonomy over what happens with their child (?)

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Good stuff.

Separating famalies is good now?
Dang, how morality has fallen.

Any civilised country would deport all of them

A country doing something you don't agree with doesn't make said country uncivilized.

[Trumptonium1]

Good stuff.

Separating famalies is good now?
Dang, how morality has fallen.

Nah, they should be deported altogether. But the US constitution is uniquely retarded in general.

Any civilised country would deport all of them

A country doing something you don't agree with doesn't make said country uncivilized.

I beg to differ.

[The Remote Islands]

Nah, they should be deported altogether. But the US constitution is uniquely retarded in general.

...then why are you defending the policy that needlessly traumatizes migrant children?

[You Gotta Be Kidding]

I say no, but in the sense that the whole family is illegal and should go.
It is not US policy breaking a family, but the actions of said family.
Of course, you have to properly interpret the 14th Amendment for this to make sense.
I welcome you to read the dissertation of the senator who authored it for clarity.

[Trumptonium1]

In a poll, 67% of US citizens are against this separating families. 23% are for it. Three former first ladies and the current first lady said that they do not support the separating of kids from families.

Quinnipiac are Dem-leaning and gave Hillary a 10 point lead in August 2016 when most were tying them and UPI gave it to Trump by 1 point and YouGov to Clinton by 3 points (the final result)

In other news, Gallup now records Trump's approval ratings at 45%, which is the highest in his presidency. This is in full public knowledge of the expanding 'family separation outrage'
https://news.gallup.com/poll/203207/tru ... eekly.aspx

So obviously either people don't care about it, or support it when the question is asked differently (i.e. do you approve of Donald Trump's immigration policy). Also Republicans majority support it and that's his only duty.

[Trumptonium1]

Nah, they should be deported altogether. But the US constitution is uniquely retarded in general.

...then why are you defending the policy that needlessly traumatizes migrant children?

Because the other option (letting everyone stay) is shittier.

I support letting parents take their children with them, if that isn't the default position already. Which, given US bureaucracy, it probably isn't.

[Firaxin]

It was their parents’ choice illegally enter the nation, and now they must deal with consequences. Those born in America are American and should be given the choice to stay if they wish or go with their family.

[NERVUN]

...then why are you defending the policy that needlessly traumatizes migrant children?

Because the other option (letting everyone stay) is shittier.

I support letting parents take their children with them, if that isn't the default position already. Which, given US bureaucracy, it probably isn't.

... Are you aware of what the hell is happening? I mean, really?

[The Remote Islands]

It wouldn't be 'shittier' in the sense that it would traumatize them. Because it wouldn't traumatize them. Hell, it isn't even a binary option, either!

There's also 1,500 of the kids straight up missing, last I heard. I wouldn't jump to claims of murder, but the fact that 1,500 fell through the cracks to begin with is still really, really, fucked up.

[Hakons]

It's a moral shame. If we're going to detain asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, they must be detained as family units.

Sessions tried to justify the policy by citing a verse in Romans that says to obey the law. He subsequently got blasted by pretty much every American religious authority, including by leadership in his own denomination.

Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless. -Isaiah

[Trumptonium1]

Because the other option (letting everyone stay) is shittier.

I support letting parents take their children with them, if that isn't the default position already. Which, given US bureaucracy, it probably isn't.

... Are you aware of what the hell is happening? I mean, really?

spare me the sanctimonious posts and leave your democrat bubble

[Trumptonium1]

It wouldn't be 'shittier' in the sense that it would traumatize them. Because it wouldn't traumatize them.

"will somebody please think of the children?"

it's only traumatising if you deliberately make it so

It's a moral shame. If we're going to detain asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, they must be detained as family units.

so you're advocating ignoring the constitution by deporting american citizens?

although i guess it depends whether we're talking about dhs separating kids at the border or ice separating kids from their parents during the deportation process

[Conserative Morality]

so you're advocating ignoring the constitution by deporting american citizens?

TIL throwing illegal immigrants in American Federal prisons is deporting them. Thanks for informing me! Sometimes I have trouble keeping up with these 'alternate facts'.

[Farnhamia]

... Are you aware of what the hell is happening? I mean, really?

spare me the sanctimonious posts and leave your democrat bubble

bubble

[Hakons]

It wouldn't be 'shittier' in the sense that it would traumatize them. Because it wouldn't traumatize them.

"will somebody please think of the children?"

it's only traumatising if you deliberately make it so

It's a moral shame. If we're going to detain asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, they must be detained as family units.

so you're advocating ignoring the constitution by deporting american citizens?

although i guess it depends whether we're talking about dhs separating kids at the border or ice separating kids from their parents during the deportation process

Um... no?

We're talking about asylum seekers, though I would prefer we not deport parents and children, for the same Christian reasons.

[Trumptonium1]

We're talking about asylum seekers,

seeking asylum from what?

though I would prefer we not deport parents and children, for the same Christian reasons.

the US is a secular country

[Hakons]

We're talking about asylum seekers,

seeking asylum from what?

though I would prefer we not deport parents and children, for the same Christian reasons.

the US is a secular country

Asylum from cartel violence, usually. It could also be economic, or they merely want to enter the city on the hill and enjoy the fruit of liberty and a free government. Our current policy unfortunately invalidates the last reason.

I'll rap all my arguments in secular reasoning, but the base for most of my positions starts with Christianity. My cause is theocracy.

[NERVUN]

... Are you aware of what the hell is happening? I mean, really?

spare me the sanctimonious posts and leave your democrat bubble

So you in fact DON'T actually know what's going on?

Not surprised.

And I live in a democrat bubble?

Dude...

Yeah.

Well, I suppose the LDP DOES have democrat in its name... kinda. But I can't imagine anyone ignorant enough to claim that Japan is in anyway shape or form a place that is within a US Democrat bubble.

[Trumptonium1]

spare me the sanctimonious posts and leave your democrat bubble

So you in fact DON'T actually know what's going on?

no sorry i don't have equal access to nippon tv to be aware of the intricacies

[Conserative Morality]

no sorry i don't have equal access to nippon tv to be aware of the intricacies

... what?

[Trumptonium1]

no sorry i don't have equal access to nippon tv to be aware of the intricacies

... what?

i have no idea nervun is talking about himself again and bringing japan into every conversation, like talking to a german. somehow conflating the party with the bubble

[Farnhamia]

spare me the sanctimonious posts and leave your democrat bubble

bubble

*** Warned for spam. ***