Does the end justify the means?

[2aguy]

White southerners want to deny blacks the right to vote, the ends, so they set about killing anyone in the south helping blacks get the right to vote, the means.

Nazis want to remove all Jews from Europe which they control, the ends, they don't have any more countries they can ship them to so they decide to gas them to death and burn their bodies, the means.

Richard Nixon is afraid the Democrats will win the 1972 election and desperately wants to stop them, the ends, he sends his operatives to break into the Democrat National Committee headquarters in the Watergate Hotel to steal information on their candidates and operations, the means.

Lying Trump is afraid of Hillary Clinton and knows she'll likely win the election if he doesn't cheat, the ends, so he colludes with the Russians to produce false ads to influence voters in his favor, the means.

Little Lying Donald sees Mueller getting closer and closer to locking him up which he desperately wants to avoid, the ends, so he concocts lie after lie about the investigation to see if anything sticks while he also tells all the cronies and criminals that have worked for him that he will pardon them so not to worry, the means.

You didn't say that correctly....

White southerners want to deny blacks the right to vote, the ends, so they set about killing anyone in the south helping blacks get the right to vote, the means.

Allow me to correct this...

White democrats...want to deny blacks the right to vote....

There, fixed that for you....

 

[2aguy]

White southerners want to deny blacks the right to vote, the ends, so they set about killing anyone in the south helping blacks get the right to vote, the means.

Nazis want to remove all Jews from Europe which they control, the ends, they don't have any more countries they can ship them to so they decide to gas them to death and burn their bodies, the means.

Richard Nixon is afraid the Democrats will win the 1972 election and desperately wants to stop them, the ends, he sends his operatives to break into the Democrat National Committee headquarters in the Watergate Hotel to steal information on their candidates and operations, the means.

Lying Trump is afraid of Hillary Clinton and knows she'll likely win the election if he doesn't cheat, the ends, so he colludes with the Russians to produce false ads to influence voters in his favor, the means.

Little Lying Donald sees Mueller getting closer and closer to locking him up which he desperately wants to avoid, the ends, so he concocts lie after lie about the investigation to see if anything sticks while he also tells all the cronies and criminals that have worked for him that he will pardon them so not to worry, the means.

The Russians had already bought and paid for hilary...to the tune of 145 million dollars....they had no need to help Trump...

 

[Wry Catcher]

The question is based on the morality of the Means. If the means are immoral, the end cannot be justified

How delightfully precious Wry

So you've predicated your entire shtick on that delicate balance betwixt what you consider moral, and what you'd consider moral turpitude.

Right now, as we chat there are multiple factions that'll appear and post that they're quite sure just what that benchmark is, how it should operate, etc etc

Few of them can look in the mirror, and realize they make scrooge look like a bleeding heart libtard by proxy of simply being a citizen of the USA

Most can't stand the truth about us, as a people, a race, a nation , instead they'll hide behind the flag or blame someone or something else

will you?

~S~

It seems our nation has made the choice, and moral turpitude describes the mood of the majority, that has decided this policy is immoral.

I wonder how many of Trump's supporters have children, and how they would react if their child was taken from them, based on a lie that doing so followed the law, a law which has never once been cited?

You asked if I will hide behind a flag, or blame someone. I blame Trump&Co.; the Swamp Critters he has appointed; every person who defends this immoral, outrageous and abusive policy; and that includes Ryan and McConnell, who have the power but are too scared to use it.

 

[2aguy]

The question is based on the morality of the Means. If the means are immoral, the end cannot be justified

How delightfully precious Wry

So you've predicated your entire shtick on that delicate balance betwixt what you consider moral, and what you'd consider moral turpitude.

Right now, as we chat there are multiple factions that'll appear and post that they're quite sure just what that benchmark is, how it should operate, etc etc

Few of them can look in the mirror, and realize they make scrooge look like a bleeding heart libtard by proxy of simply being a citizen of the USA

Most can't stand the truth about us, as a people, a race, a nation , instead they'll hide behind the flag or blame someone or something else

will you?

~S~

It seems our nation has made the choice, and moral turpitude describes the mood of the majority, that has decided this policy is immoral.

I wonder how many of Trump's supporters have children, and how they would react if their child was taken from them, based on a lie that doing so followed the law, a law which has never once been cited?

You asked if I will hide behind a flag, or blame someone. I blame Trump&Co.; the Swamp Critters he has appointed; every person who defends this immoral, outrageous and abusive policy; and that includes Ryan and McConnell, who have the power but are too scared to use it.

If the Trump supporter committed a crime they would understand that they would be separated from their children....

And obama was doing the exact same thing and for some reason you didn't say shit......

The Media Are Lying About Trump Separating Illegal Immigrant Families. Here’s The Truth.

This is a lie.

More specifically, it’s several lies.

1. Trump Created Separation Of Children From Illegal Immigrant Parents. This is plainly false. In 1997, the federal government made an agreement in a case called Flores not to keep unaccompanied illegal immigrant children in custody beyond 20 days. The settlement said nothing about accompanied illegal immigrant children – children who crossed the border with their parents. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals then ruled that accompanied children also could not be held in custody under the terms of the settlement. This meant that the government either had to release whole families, or that the government had to separate parents from children.

2. Immigrants Seeking Asylum Are Being Punished For Seeking Asylum. This is plainly untrue as well. Immigrants who come to points of entry to seek asylum aren’t actually illegally in the country – they’re not arrested. They’re processed through ICE, and their children stay with them. If, however, illegal immigrants cross the border illegally, the Trump administration now treats them as criminals. If they choose deportation, they aren’t separated from their kids; if they choose to apply for asylum, they stay in the country longer than 20 days, and their kids have to be removed by operation of law.

 

[Wry Catcher]

As pointed out, the question was asked in a survey course in world history, and most would understand the Ends and Means are those designed by Kings, Tsars, Generals, etc., and within the scope of this thread, the Press Conference with the Sec. of Homeland Security today.

Is the Means, taking baby's and young children from the arms of their parents, justified. And, what are Ends, i.e. not only the agenda of Trump, Sessions and Nielsen, but the impact on these innocent children and on the perception of the people all over the world of America.

In this case, the failed, unwarranted Trump policy of separating children from their families hasn’t worked, given the fact there has been no decrease in the number of immigrants coming to the United States.

The policy was supposed to be a ‘deterrent’ to immigration, and it has had no such effect.

Using children in this matter is abusive and immoral; for the fiscal conservative, a huge cost of taxpayer money with no cost-benefit.

What is your solution to morally and inexpensively cut off the flow of illegal aliens and their children across our border?

I have no magic solution to mitigate what Trump, Sessions and Nielsen have done, since Trump has alienated Mexico, slandered the Mexican and Central American governments and people, other than to vote my conscience and hope other people have one. Clearly you don't.

We need an effective and fully funded Dept of State, to fix diplomatically what Trump has destroyed. A Congress to function within the traditional values of our nation, and not those of a banana republic or worse, and a W. H. functioning with no drama and no chaos, but with a consistent goal of establishing win-win solutions.

I didn't ask you to mitigate anything Trump has done. Or for a diplomatic solution to anything.
What is your solution to morally and inexpensively cut off the flow of illegal aliens and their children across our border?
Or is your solution to let the flow continue, unimpeded?

My "solution" is to expose people like you as callous jerks. My solution is to continue to express my opinion that callous conservatism has gone to far, and callous conservatives have rejected traditional American values.

The solution is NOT to separate families and create hate and fear of all American citizens, in those abused by the few and the callous. Try to think how the children raised to hate American's acted on 9-ll. Why do we go out of our way to create terrorists?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

In this case, the failed, unwarranted Trump policy of separating children from their families hasn’t worked, given the fact there has been no decrease in the number of immigrants coming to the United States.

The policy was supposed to be a ‘deterrent’ to immigration, and it has had no such effect.

Using children in this matter is abusive and immoral; for the fiscal conservative, a huge cost of taxpayer money with no cost-benefit.

What is your solution to morally and inexpensively cut off the flow of illegal aliens and their children across our border?

I have no magic solution to mitigate what Trump, Sessions and Nielsen have done, since Trump has alienated Mexico, slandered the Mexican and Central American governments and people, other than to vote my conscience and hope other people have one. Clearly you don't.

We need an effective and fully funded Dept of State, to fix diplomatically what Trump has destroyed. A Congress to function within the traditional values of our nation, and not those of a banana republic or worse, and a W. H. functioning with no drama and no chaos, but with a consistent goal of establishing win-win solutions.

I didn't ask you to mitigate anything Trump has done. Or for a diplomatic solution to anything.
What is your solution to morally and inexpensively cut off the flow of illegal aliens and their children across our border?
Or is your solution to let the flow continue, unimpeded?

My "solution" is to expose people like you as callous jerks. My solution is to continue to express my opinion that callous conservatism has gone to far, and callous conservatives have rejected traditional American values.

The solution is NOT to separate families and create hate and fear of all American citizens, in those abused by the few and the callous. Try to think how the children raised to hate American's acted on 9-ll. Why do we go out of our way to create terrorists?

Great, I'm a callous jerk.

What is your solution to morally and inexpensively cut off the flow of illegal aliens and their children across our border?
Or is your solution to let the flow continue, unimpeded?​

 

[flacaltenn]

cut the personal crap. Six deleted. Thread is in danger of being permanently closed..

 

[theHawk]

As pointed out, the question was asked in a survey course in world history, and most would understand the Ends and Means are those designed by Kings, Tsars, Generals, etc., and within the scope of this thread, the Press Conference with the Sec. of Homeland Security today.

Is the Means, taking baby's and young children from the arms of their parents, justified. And, what are Ends, i.e. not only the agenda of Trump, Sessions and Nielsen, but the impact on these innocent children and on the perception of the people all over the world of America.

Now you liberals want to shut down child protective services?

 

[Wry Catcher]

As pointed out, the question was asked in a survey course in world history, and most would understand the Ends and Means are those designed by Kings, Tsars, Generals, etc., and within the scope of this thread, the Press Conference with the Sec. of Homeland Security today.

Is the Means, taking baby's and young children from the arms of their parents, justified. And, what are Ends, i.e. not only the agenda of Trump, Sessions and Nielsen, but the impact on these innocent children and on the perception of the people all over the world of America.

Now you liberals want to shut down child protective services?

Straw Man Alert ^^^

Protective services remove a child if the child is abused, mentally or physically, and such a removal is sanctioned within 48 judicial hours by a Juvenile Judge or Commissioner.

Common sense suggests that those women holding babies or walking along with a toddler holding his or her hand, are not abusive, and the vast majority of parents are fleeing violence in their home country and seeking a safe harbor for their children.

 

[theHawk]

As pointed out, the question was asked in a survey course in world history, and most would understand the Ends and Means are those designed by Kings, Tsars, Generals, etc., and within the scope of this thread, the Press Conference with the Sec. of Homeland Security today.

Is the Means, taking baby's and young children from the arms of their parents, justified. And, what are Ends, i.e. not only the agenda of Trump, Sessions and Nielsen, but the impact on these innocent children and on the perception of the people all over the world of America.

Now you liberals want to shut down child protective services?

Straw Man Alert ^^^

Protective services remove a child if the child is abused, mentally or physically, and such a removal is sanctioned within 48 judicial hours by a Juvenile Judge or Commissioner.

Common sense suggests that those women holding babies or walking along with a toddler holding his or her hand, are not abusive, and the vast majority of parents are fleeing violence in their home country and seeking a safe harbor for their children.

Actually taking a child across the border in the desert is putting their lives in danger. Common sense suggests such parents should be charged with child neglect or abuse and custody taken away at least temporarily.

 

[Wry Catcher]

As pointed out, the question was asked in a survey course in world history, and most would understand the Ends and Means are those designed by Kings, Tsars, Generals, etc., and within the scope of this thread, the Press Conference with the Sec. of Homeland Security today.

Is the Means, taking baby's and young children from the arms of their parents, justified. And, what are Ends, i.e. not only the agenda of Trump, Sessions and Nielsen, but the impact on these innocent children and on the perception of the people all over the world of America.

Now you liberals want to shut down child protective services?

Straw Man Alert ^^^

Protective services remove a child if the child is abused, mentally or physically, and such a removal is sanctioned within 48 judicial hours by a Juvenile Judge or Commissioner.

Common sense suggests that those women holding babies or walking along with a toddler holding his or her hand, are not abusive, and the vast majority of parents are fleeing violence in their home country and seeking a safe harbor for their children.

Actually taking a child across the border in the desert is putting their lives in danger. Common sense suggests such parents should be charged with child neglect or abuse and custody taken away at least temporarily.

"?Common sense"? Nice spin, too bad reality makes it common but not very sensible. What would you do if your child was living in harms way? Stay and Pray?

Neglect? Another silly claim, they are motivated to protect their child from gangs, drugs, lawlessness and seeking a better, safer future. .