I guess I don't understand the faux outrage on illegal children

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Horn6721, Jun 14, 2018.

  1. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    being separated from their illegal parents.
    Everything I have read shows we bend over backwards to provide safe places for them with food, medical, on site counselors and planned activities games etc.Oh no the horror! We will create soft side centers for these kids whose parents broke our laws>(We all agree, the parents broke our laws)
    Was it our fault their parents willingly broke our laws? Do we have a policy for asylum seekers? Yes we do.
    Can we take in and support every single person in the world? Where is the line drawn?

    But the most important question imo is why are lefties so outraged over this "separation" and yet say zero about parents sent to prison every day?
  2. mchammer

    mchammer 2,500+ Posts

  3. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 5,000+ Posts

    I'm mildly annoyed by the policy and recognize it simply as a stupid policy designed to intimidate parents from trying to immigrate (legally and illegally) with their children. The only reason to do it is for intimidation purposes. Yes, the parents are wrong for dragging their children across the border. That doesn't make it "right" to separate their kids from their parents.

    On the flipside, for the party that claims to hold family values dear, why aren't conservatives more upset at the tactic?
  4. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    So SH are you as mildly annoyed when we separate children from legal parents sent to prison?
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 5,000+ Posts

    When did crossing illegally into the US become a felony? The punishment should match the crime.
  6. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    They can be fined or thrown in the slammer for up to 6 months for the first offense and fined or thrown in the slammer for up to 2 years for a subsequent offense. Link.
    • Like Like x 1
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2018
  7. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    I love when we start having these discussions and leftists start pretending they care what the Bible says, and start pulling Leviticus 19:33 out of context to claim that the Bible teaches open borders. Actually, I don't love that, it's the other thing.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. OUBubba

    OUBubba 1,000+ Posts

    Didn't that new guy effectively throw out texts like Leviticus? Something like he's the new Covenant. I wish we practiced the beatitudes. I'm just a lefty though [insert kermit sipping tea gif]
  9. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I don't like this policy, but the big thing I don't like about the liberal critics of the policy is that they have no solution other than not to enforce the law. What I'd rather see is a plan to enforce the law without separating minor children from their parents. If the parents are taken into custody, then take the children into custody with them pending the outcome of their criminal trial for illegal entry.

    Of course, once convicted and sent to jail, the children have to be separated. We're not going to jail children without due process just because their parents did something dangerous and illegal.
  10. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    The people bringing children illegally into our country know we will keep the children safe, house them, give them health care, education and entertainment.. If the people are actually their parents I think they would say what we give them is a better life than they had.
    We do more for these kids than we do for children of citizens in prison. Much of the time we can't verify parentage.

    Obama loosened the policies for asylum which caused this continued uptick. THIS has to stop.
    Then we have to find parents or relatives, get the kids to them even if it is back in their native country.
    • Like Like x 2
  11. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 500+ Posts

  12. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    I am still unclear on what Dems want other than to try to make Trump look bad.
    For the last 2 days tweets with pics have floated around showing how horrible Trump is treating these children only to find out the pics are from 2014.
    Was there the same Dem outrage then? Uh NO

    If children should not be separated should we keep them with the illegals who brought them and who were arrested?
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2018
  13. mchammer

    mchammer 2,500+ Posts

    Dems have no credible policy against Trump except higher taxes and open borders. So they resort to Stormy Daniels and separated kids.
  14. theiioftx

    theiioftx 2,500+ Posts

    The MSM coverage of this was simply a diversion tactic for the OIG report. All you have to do is listen to multiple liberal talk shows to see they have been fed the narrative from the DNC.
  15. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    Not sure which guy, but the book of Leviticus is a book that outlines a civil and religious law that was given to Israel something like 3000 years ago. It was never applied to anyone other than Israel. Just because there are commonalities with the teachings that came about under the gospel, and just because Jesus taught those principles as universal, that doesn't mean we're obligated to follow the whole law.

    (Example: Just because Mexican law says I can't kill someone, that doesn't mean I'm under Mexican law. Christians believe adultery is sinful because it is a fundamental moral principle which God instituted in the beginning, and was then reiterated by Jesus and the apostles - not because it's in the 10 Commandments.)

    But leaving that aside, there are a couple of issues. First, the passage is not referencing immigration. This is NOT talking about people who decide one day that "I want to be an Israelite." The law is VERY clear that you don't get to decide whether you are a citizen of Israel or not. It was a birthright, and it completely excluded non-Jews.

    (NOTE: apologies - I would add scripture but I'm on my work laptop. If you don't believe me on these, I'm glad to provide book chapter and verse when I get home.)

    A gentile could not own property in Israel under the law. All of that was given to the 12 tribes. A gentile would also be put to death for worshiping foreign gods. (Or they were supposed to be put to death.) A gentile was excluded from the rights and benefits of being a Hebrew. Even if they converted, they were still not a Jew, and still could not go into the temple or participate in the nation as a Jew.

    Second problem is, even if the law says what they claim it says, why do they ignore all the other parts of the law? For those who want to use the Hebrew model of "immigration" - are they also OK with the following:

    - No "foreign gods - in other words, you worship Jehovah, or you are put to death.
    - No working on the sabbath - even if you're a gentile, if you lived in Israel, and you worked on the sabbath, you could/would be executed.
    - The poor have to harvest their own food - which is left by the farmers specifically for them to gather.
    - The law is specifically to be applied to rich and poor equally, meaning that there is no special treatment for someone who is poor. Their circumstances are irrelevant to whether they have to abide by the law.
    - Adulterers are stoned.
    - Homosexuals are stoned.
    - No eating shellfish, pork, or other unclean foods.
    - Animal sacrifice
    - No permanent transfer of property
    - If someone kills your relative, you get to kill them in retaliation unless they escape to a "city of refuge."

    Weird that the left becomes big fans of the law of Moses when it's convenient and then leaves out all the things about it that they hate. But you can't have it both ways.

    Great. Head on down there and help one of those families. But the beatitudes aren't about you appointing someone in the government to go do your good works for you. In addition, the Bible makes no requirements on a person being responsible for the welfare of people in other countries. We are called to care for our neighbors and take opportunities to do good. If you have a chance to help someone overseas, that's great. But the call is consistently related to helping our neighbors, those we meet who are in need. And no, that doesn't mean seeing a poor person, tweeting self-righteously about it and then voting for someone who claims they will "do something."

    The Bible says nothing about governmentally supporting a practice where anyone in any country can simply show up with a child and force their way into the country and automatically receive the benefits of citizenship.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 500+ Posts

  17. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 5,000+ Posts

    That's the statute but are we really jailing throngs of people that come across the border? Yes, they are in custody pending their review that really seems like a "maximum" that never gets applied. Of course, it's entirely possible that it could take 6 months to process them but we aren't purposely jailing them for the infraction.
  18. mchammer

    mchammer 2,500+ Posts

    • Like Like x 2
  19. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    If not for trying to get in illegally why are we jailing them?
    for littering?
    Would we Jail ( or would you prefer the word " detain"?) them if they had come here legally?
  20. OUBubba

    OUBubba 1,000+ Posts

    Jesus and New Testament > Prophets and the Old Testament...

    And to be clear, I don't know the answer on this. That said, I would recommend not utilizing the Bible to justify your actions in this scenario.

    PS: It also looks very poor to put the Hitleresque branding on the shelters and blaming the Democrats for this policy.
  21. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 5,000+ Posts

    Keep in mind. They haven't been convicted of anything yet. In your analogy you are assuming they are guilty of some crime. We know that some are literally coming across, holding up their arms and requesting asylum. That's a legal process.
  22. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    You guys are the ones trying to use scripture to push your agenda. No one on the right was out there saying "the Bible teaches that we should protect our borders." Leftists are the ones dusting off their Bible, ignoring the 95 percent that they hate and picking out passages that fit their preferred ideology.

    I'm simply saying that the Bible doesn't teach that nations should allow people to enter the country and become citizens whenever they want, and that no nation has the right to send those people back home. Don't blame me because your side is being dishonest with the scripture.
    • Like Like x 3
  23. Crockett

    Crockett 5,000+ Posts

    Yeah, I guess nobody actually cares about actual people or policies.... just how it plays out in reality TV. Apparently, it would just be impossible for you to fathom that anybody cares about the inconsolable toddler separated from his Mom and the lasting impact the trauma may have on his/her mental development.

    In your eyes, Democrats just care about the impact of how that looks on TV. And I guess the Trump folks don't care at all. We're getting the leadership and the media we deserve.
  24. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I think the plan is to actually prosecute them when caught.
  25. OUBubba

    OUBubba 1,000+ Posts

    Granny played the spade.

  26. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    And he was correct, although it's pretty clear in that quote that he's responding to people who are attempting to use the Bible to argue that if you aren't for open borders, then you're not really a Christian. So no, it doesn't appear that he started the "I'm holy and you're not" argument. His point was not that "the Bible says that we should separate parents and children" or "the Bible says we should close our borders." The passage simply indicates that nations are a concept blessed by God, that they have the right to exist and pass laws necessary to maintain law and order, and that we have an obligation as Christians to obey the laws of the land.

    There are no specific mandates in that passage. He doesn't seem to be saying that "the way we're handling it is the right way to do it and the Bible says so." But of course, dems then did what they do best: they created a binary choice of either allowing immigration to anyone who shows up with a child or "tearing a baby from the parent's arms."

    When a criminal breaks the law and goes to jail, we don't say "Wait, he has kids, and we can't separate families!" He goes to jail. If we would simply enforce the law and do it consistently, we wouldn't be having these issues, because parents wouldn't be sending their kids on these cross-country journeys either unaccompanied or with another adult.

    Reminds me of the episode of The Office where Michael Scott is trying to fire someone and it turns into a fiasco. The interviewer asks him if he's ever gone hunting, and his response is "I went once. Shot a deer but it didn't die, and I ended up having to hit it with a shovel. It took about an hour." When we see enforcing the law as unpleasant and we try to find a "nice" way to do it, we create a system of mixed messages, and it causes people to engage in risky behavior with the belief that ultimately no matter what we say, we're not sending that kid back home.

    That's not a Dem or GOP thing. Both parties have been too weak to enforce the law, so we get inconsistent, half-hearted enforcement and messaging, and we end up with situations like this where "the only humane thing to do is to let the adults and children go free together."
    • Like Like x 4
  27. Htown77

    Htown77 5,000+ Posts

    • Like Like x 1
  28. Htown77

    Htown77 5,000+ Posts

    Also this:


    Having recently read through the old testament, even with the english translation, the context indicated it meant legal aliens.

    Although, I would agree it is still wrong for Americans to underpay illegal immigrants (below minimum wage) and mistreat them.

    As for this policy, I agree with @Mr. Deez. I am not a fan and would not do it if I was in charge. That said, we do separate kids from parents that commit crimes. I would not choose this policy, but it also is not out of the ordinary. Luckily, I did not vote for Trump so I do not own any of it anyway.

    I also agree with Deez and Prodigal that the sinful misuse of scruptire by the left needs to stop.
    • Like Like x 1
  29. huisache

    huisache 2,500+ Posts

    2 point plan to solve the anguish:

    Let Stormy Daniels care for the tykes

    Start jailing a few employers

    Bonus point: blow up the Ivy League colleges, including the one President Bone Spur attended
    • Like Like x 1
  30. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Liquor Man

    Bonus point? Hell, that's a walkoff grand slam for anybody who could accomplish it!

Share This Page