What human cost is acceptable in controling illegal immigration?

[koshergrl]

Guess what, 'all of Central America' is not seeking asylum. Anyway, there is such a thing as economic asylum seekers, that you don't recognize that status exists means you need to read more.

Who is an asylum seeker, and who is a refugee?

As defined in Article 1(1)(a) of the 1951 Convention for Refugee Protection, a refugee is an individual who is fleeing his/her country of origin, owing to a well-founded fear of persecution on grounds of race, nationality, ethnicity, or affiliation to a particular political group. An asylum seeker is a person who has yet to make an application to the host country, or is awaiting a decision on an application or claim that has already been made or submitted. As with refugee law, under human rights law as well, (eg., Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), every individual has a right to ask a State for asylum; however, there exists no duty on States to grant asylum, but only to consider fairly the claim for asylum made before them. While every asylum seeker might not become a refugee (if their claim is denied), every refugee at some point has been an asylum seeker (awaiting a refugee status determination).

Distinguishing Between Asylum Seekers and Economic Migrants: An Analysis of State Practice

We are legally obliged to consider all people seeking asylum. And they are people, not animals and should be treated as human but for whatever god damned reason you want asylum seekers to pay some sort of emotional price for their decision to better their lives from where they came from and to do it legally. Kind of fucked up on your part.

Go eat another ******* taco, you sweaty beaner, because you ain't getting all your friends and relatives in. Anchor babies or not.

There we go, don't have an argument so you go full on wingnut.

No, the argument against letting Central America rape us is still valid. Now go make me some tequila.

Central America isn't raping us, not sure why you're having that fantasy. That is one of the dumbest statements I've ever heard.

Actually, we've done our share of harm to the region to include supporting dictators and right wing death squads.

Sorry, your friends can't ALL come here. Some is ok, we still need some uneducated laborers, but not everyone.

They aren't fit for physical labor either.

 

[Taz]

Oh well.

I'm sure Taz will be delighted to know that you and him are simpatico on this issue.

Si, senorita.

I'm sure it makes you happy.

Better than having a Chico lover agree with me.

What did you call me? Chico is boy in Spanish, you're a mod, what the **** is wrong with you?

EDIT: You're not a mod, I had you confused with someone who uses 'Taz' in their name, I'm glad to see that he hasn't lost his god damned mind and is an entirely different person than you.

 

[Taz]

They are not people. They are goddamn animals.

I think Taz agrees with you.

Your avatar is a dog. So yes.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump:

"If you are smuggling a child then we will prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you as required by law," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Monday at a law enforcement conference in Scottsdale, Arizona. "If you don't like that, then don't smuggle children over our border."

Administration officials explained that the goal of the program is 100 percent prosecution of all who enter the U.S. illegally. When adults are prosecuted and jailed, their children will be separated from them, just as would happen for a U.S. citizen convicted and jailed.​

Anguish at Southwest border as more immigrant children are separated from parents

The Trump administration's willingness to take children from their parents has raised concerns about how far authorities should go to stem unauthorized border crossings and what human cost is acceptable in the name of border security and immigration control.

"There is something terrible happening here that Americans would not support if they understood it," said F. Scott McCown, director of the Children’s Rights Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law.​

I don't care how much you hate illegal immigrants this is EVIL. You are punishing the children. It's abhorrant and wrong and inexcusable. I hope they rot in hell for this. 700 children so far have been seperated from the only family they know and lost to our often incompetent and mismanaged child care system. I fail to see how any parent could support actions like these.

When parents are held for prosecution, their children are turned over to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, part of the Department of Health and Human Services. The children are then designated as "unaccompanied minors," and the government tries to connect them to family members who are already in the U.S. Until then, children wait in shelters or are sent to federally contracted foster homes, often without parents being told exactly where they are, immigration advocates said.

It may soon become even more difficult to place children with relatives. The Department of Homeland Security is proposing immigration checks be done on all people in a household who may take in these "unaccompanied" children, which means relatives who are undocumented may be less likely to come forward.

In the meantime, space in shelters and foster homes is limited; The Washington Post reported the administration plans to open facilities at military bases to house some of the separated children.​

Maybe obey our Laws and enter the Country legally? It's a thought.

I have no problem with that. I have no problem with a hearing and, if determined deportation.

Do you think it's necessary to inact this draconian policy in the meantime?

My understanding is that it would be inhumane to house small children in adult detention facilities with potential pedophiles or other serious criminals. Kind of makes sense doesn't? Would you want your 8 year old child housed in a maximum security prison with adult male inmates? My guess is probably not.

That is why kids are adults are separated. Plus...it is the Law. And we are a Nation of Laws or should be.

We are a nation of laws but we also can exercise discretion. Families don’t have to be housed in with serious offenders. Kids don’t have to be removed. We exercised this discretion before why not now?

Good point.

So we exercised that discretion before, and what result do we have today?

That the leftists went to court and demanded that that discretion no longer be available, and demanded the policy they are now trying to blame President Trump for, all in service of their REAL agenda, open borders.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We are a nation of laws but we also can exercise discretion.

Interesting...

How much? How much discretion is required for it to be acceptable?

You say we're a nation of laws. Are we? Are we a nation of laws when we continually look for ways to circumvent them like we do with immigration? Like states and cities do with sanctuary laws?

Families don’t have to be housed in with serious offenders. Kids don’t have to be removed. We exercised this discretion before why not now?

That's like saying there should be no consequences for their coming here illegally. If they aren't going to obey our laws with one set of consequences, then another continuum of consequences must be set in place. The severity of the punishment must be enhanced.

What do you think would serve as a reliable and "humane" deterrent?

Come now. You know perfectly well that Coyote doesn't want ANY deterrents, and considers ALL deterrents to be "inhumane". She doesn't necessarily want to come right out and admit it, but the "discretion" she's REALLY demanding is for the government to go back to simply releasing adult illegals into the population. Any policy that involves detaining illegals and deporting them will be screeched about - dishonestly and hypocritically - on the basis of any straw man these lying sacks can devise.

Coyote cares less for these children than most people do for stray cats in an alley. They're just a handy tool at the moment, and her idea of what's "humane" for them has nothing to do with THEM, and everything to do with what serves her agenda.

 

[Cecilie1200]

As I said, appeal it or shut the f******.

Don't tell me what to do troll.

Be a misinformed traitor then lol... This is the Trump disgrace so far, and fox Etc making up garbage about our justice system...

LOL You called him a traitor.

That's funny. Because he's not. You can't call everyone who disagrees with you a traitor.

People who denigrate our esteemed institutions with no evidence are deplorable.

It's a free country. A free country elected Trump. I'm sorry you can't handle that.

In the event you grow a spine, perhaps you will learn to deal with it.

He's gonna have to grow some "little gray cells", as Hercule Poirot called them, first.

 

[Cosmos]

A human would go the the Port of Entry and present their immigrant visa that they obtained at the US Consulate in Mexico City.

A ******* animal crosses anywhere they can get away with it.

So yeah, there's that aspect.

An animal? Yep, you guys love to treat other humans as 'animals'.

BTW, it's not illegal to arrive at the border and present yourself as an asylum seeker, putz.

They can also do that at the US Consulate in Mexico City, dipshit. People who cross into the US illegally are no different than wild dogs.

I suppose, but why does it matter if it's legal either way?

Dipshit, seeking asylum at the border is not crossing it illegally.

And even those who do try to cross illegally, they aren't dogs, they are still people and should be treated as such, especially in our justice system it's what separates the United States from the likes of Cuba, China, Saudi Arabia and others.

They are not people. They are goddamn animals. If they were people they would respect borders and laws. They would obtain the proper legal paperwork and go to a legal Port of Entry where they would ask for permission to enter our country. They are ******* animals that pay no attention to such things. I don't know what the purpose is of the radical fascist leftist in this country who are trying to undermine our borders, but it can't be good. Maybe you can tell us.

They would obtain the proper legal paperwork and go to a legal Port of Entry where they would ask for permission to enter our country. They are ******* animals that pay no attention to such things.

The Trump admin is separating even those asylum seekers who appear at a port of entry.
There is no crime in applying for asylum. It is a legal process.

ACLU: Trump administration forcibly separating asylum-seekers from their children

A mother and her 7-year-old daughter escaping persecution and "near certain death" by fleeing the Democratic Republic of Congohave been separated for nearly four months, according to a legal complaint filed today by the ACLU.

Referred to in the case as "Ms. L" and "S.S.," the mother and daughter arrived in San Ysidro, California, Nov. 1. They told border guards they were seeking asylum, according to the court documents. Ms. L passed what's called a "credible fear interview," where an officer determined she and S.S. had a "significant possibility of ultimately receiving asylum."

Like many asylum-seekers, the two were detained while their application was processed. Under longstanding policy, families typically are kept intact at detention centers or released with a court date.

But just four days after arriving in the U.S., Ms. L was sent to Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego County while S.S. was ripped away from her and flown to another center in Chicago, according to the filing. S.S. speaks Lingala, a few words of Spanish and no English.

Contacted by ABC News about the case, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said the department does not comment on pending litigation.

The complaint claims, "When the officers separated them, Ms. L. could hear her daughter in the next room frantically screaming that she wanted to remain with her mother.” Ms. L said that no one involved in the process explained that her daughter would be taken away, to where she would be taken or when they would next see each other.

This story stinks to high heaven. You're expecting us to believe that this woman and her daughter feared for their life in the Congo, somehow magically escaped and arrived in San Ysidro, California, the first place they came across where they could find asylum. Bullshit. She was brought there by human traffickers after paying a fee and she should be immediately sent straight back to Congo.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sorry, I don't believe in open borders. And I don't believe in filling the country with unskilled workers. I didn't say we didn't need ANY, just not a free-for-all.

Nobody believes in open borders, can we finally kill that strawman? Like it or not, we need unskilled workers here, we don't have enough currently but you'd rather blabber about some idiotic notion that you don't believe in 'filling the country with unskilled workers', whatever that hell that means. Shit,who can argue with such a defined and well thought out position.

Then your concession is duly noted. Thank you.

Wasn't there a troll on this board who used to reply to posts just like that? Can't remember his name but when he ran out of things to say he basically took credit for a concession that was never given.

What you have given is stating that you don't give a shit about families of immigrants who even come here legally to be separated and your reason for not caring which is an influx of unskilled workers isn't even a problem and in actuality we need more of them but you ignore all of that and go on your merry way.

Coming here illegally isn't coming here legally. Now you know.

Asylum seekers who are also being separated from their children are coming here legally. It shouldn't be done with any families but especially not those that are following the rules. Please keep up.

Why would anyone want to keep up with the ridiculous lies you leftists tell? You don't even acknowledge when you're proven to be lying; you just pivot and go right to the next lie as though nothing happened, even when it directly contradicts the previous lie.

We have your number, Chuckles. We know the best way to tell if HappyJoy, Coyote, Franco, and Flopper are lying on the message board is to check if their fingers are typing.

You want us to believe that asylum seekers who are following all the appropriate, designated procedures are being separated from their children as a matter of policy? Spend less time telling us how "outraged" you are and how "ashamed" you mistakenly believe you have the right to demand we should be, and more time proving it. Because as far as I'm concerned, the fact that YOU are saying it automatically makes it an utter, 100% fabricated pile of horseshit all by itself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

We are a nation of laws but we also can exercise discretion.

Interesting...

How much? How much discretion is required for it to be acceptable?

You say we're a nation of laws. Are we? Are we a nation of laws when we continually look for ways to circumvent them like we do with immigration? Like states and cities do with sanctuary laws?

Families don’t have to be housed in with serious offenders. Kids don’t have to be removed. We exercised this discretion before why not now?

That's like saying there should be no consequences for their coming here illegally. If they aren't going to obey our laws with one set of consequences, then another continuum of consequences must be set in place. The severity of the punishment must be enhanced.

What do you think would serve as a reliable and "humane" deterrent?

How is that saying there should be no consequences?

They are detained.
They will get a hearing.
They will most likely be deported.

At a minimum, because there could also be incarceration or fines.

How are those NOT consequences?

Mostly because what you're angling for is that none of those consequences will actually take place.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe obey our Laws and enter the Country legally? It's a thought.

I have no problem with that. I have no problem with a hearing and, if determined deportation.

Do you think it's necessary to inact this draconian policy in the meantime?

My understanding is that it would be inhumane to house small children in adult detention facilities with potential pedophiles or other serious criminals. Kind of makes sense doesn't? Would you want your 8 year old child housed in a maximum security prison with adult male inmates? My guess is probably not.

That is why kids are adults are separated. Plus...it is the Law. And we are a Nation of Laws or should be.

We are a nation of laws but we also can exercise discretion. Families don’t have to be housed in with serious offenders. Kids don’t have to be removed. We exercised this discretion before why not now?

Sorry....the law is the law. Under US law in this circumstance kids have to be removed to protect them when their adult parents have broken the law and you do not want to house kids in adult correctional facilities. And yeah....their parents broke the law so they have to go in correctional facilities just like the rest of us when we break the law.

Kind of easy to understand in my opinion. Slave owners exercised "discretion" in violation of US Law. It doesn't make it right. Either we are a Nation of Laws or we are not. It really could not be more simple. You cannot pick and choose the Laws you like versus the ones you do not.

Jaywalking is against the law. So is parking in no parking areas. Should their kids be removed? Should they be put into correctional institutions? Why aren’t they?

Entering the country illegally is NOT jaywalking and parking violations. I realize to US-hating unpatriotic traitors like YOU, it has no more importance than that, but we've gone past the point where anyone is taking your ilk and its bullshit seriously any more. You're just going to have to learn to live with the fact that the people who actually LIKE our country and want to protect it outnumber you, and have very little patience with any presumption of moral authority on your part.

To simplify it for simpletons like you, jaywalkers and parking violators are not put in jail because the law doesn't specify that punishment for their crime. Illegal aliens ARE put in jail because the law DOES specify that for THEIR crime.

It's almost like different crimes have different severity and different punishments, and very much like the law doesn't agree with your cavalier, dismissive view of illegals. Wow. What's it like to have reality itself slap you down and kick you to the curb like so much trash?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Coming here illegally isn't coming here legally. Now you know.

Asylum seekers who are also being separated from their children are coming here legally. It shouldn't be done with any families but especially not those that are following the rules. Please keep up.

Oh well.

I'm sure Taz will be delighted to know that you and him are simpatico on this issue.

There's a reason for separating the kids. The people trying to smuggle them in know that is what they are facing. For the most part, these are not safe people to leave children with..they tend not to really care what happens to them.

And the ones who are stellar wonderful parents who aren't traffickers or gang members or wanted for a crime somewhere..they will be reunited with their kids later. They knew that, they chose this route.

There are thousands of kids involved...kids do get lost in the system. It is not designed to handle this kind of load. I guarantee kids will get lost.

And I guarantee that your guarantee has slightly less value than a bucket of warm spit.

Try proving that "kids do get lost in the system". Granted, I don't think the system does a stellar job of taking care of long-term foster children (but then, it wasn't conservatives who demanded those kids go INTO the foster system, was it?), but that's a far cry from claiming they simply lose them.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Coming here illegally isn't coming here legally. Now you know.

Asylum seekers who are also being separated from their children are coming here legally. It shouldn't be done with any families but especially not those that are following the rules. Please keep up.

Oh well.

I'm sure Taz will be delighted to know that you and him are simpatico on this issue.

There's a reason for separating the kids. The people trying to smuggle them in know that is what they are facing. For the most part, these are not safe people to leave children with..they tend not to really care what happens to them.

Most kids crossing the border with adults are their families, if there is reason to believe or those parents are unable to prove they are there kids than a simple DNA test will resolve that.

And the ones who are stellar wonderful parents who aren't traffickers or gang members or wanted for a crime somewhere..they will be reunited with their kids later. They knew that, they chose this route.

Shouldn't be separated in the first place. They knew what? That they are leaving literal death traps behind wanting a better life for them and their children, it's probably still worth the risk to seek asylum and you want them to pay some sort of emotional toll for it. Pretty sick.

You're making great points for Taz though, basically '**** them, make 'em pay'.

"Shouldn't be separated in the first place." Guess you lefties should have thought about that before you screamed for the kids to be released, then, huh?

 

[Cecilie1200]

We are a nation of laws but we also can exercise discretion.

Interesting...

How much? How much discretion is required for it to be acceptable?

You say we're a nation of laws. Are we? Are we a nation of laws when we continually look for ways to circumvent them like we do with immigration? Like states and cities do with sanctuary laws?

Families don’t have to be housed in with serious offenders. Kids don’t have to be removed. We exercised this discretion before why not now?

That's like saying there should be no consequences for their coming here illegally. If they aren't going to obey our laws with one set of consequences, then another continuum of consequences must be set in place. The severity of the punishment must be enhanced.

What do you think would serve as a reliable and "humane" deterrent?

How is that saying there should be no consequences?

They are detained.
They will get a hearing.
They will most likely be deported.

At a minimum, because there could also be incarceration or fines.

How are those NOT consequences?

They are. But apparently the existing set of these so-called consequences do not serve as a strong enough deterrent. Something more needs to be done.

Incarceration is insufficient because they will have gotten what they wanted from the country they came to illegally. Food and shelter. They get more than that if they flee to a sanctuary.

Fines are insufficient, what money are they going to pay them with?

Hearings serve little to no purpose when the party concerned fails to show up for it. Which also makes incarcerating and detaining them a moot point.

Detention serves little purpose when we allow them to skirt our immigration laws by fleeing to sanctuary cities.

Reporting them only means we get to see them cross our border again. Which just shows how little these people care about the existing consequences.

Despite all of this, they keep doing it, they keep breaking our laws. No, these are no longer are consequences. Just unfulfilled ultimatums. I get the feeling you want to maintain the status quo. Stay the course with consequences that these people are not afraid of.

Take their child away from them, and that will instill fear and compliance. That is a consequence they will pay attention to.

Immigration is down regardless.

But removing children from families as a punishment. That's a new low.

It's what happens when you leftists use kids as human shields to front your lies, instead of being honest about what you want up-front, so that it can be decided on in the open.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Then it clearly is not so terrible to you. It's a human cost you find WORTH IT.

They don't see them as human.

A human would go the the Port of Entry and present their immigrant visa that they obtained at the US Consulate in Mexico City.

A ******* animal crosses anywhere they can get away with it.

So yeah, there's that aspect.

An animal? Yep, you guys love to treat other humans as 'animals'.

BTW, it's not illegal to arrive at the border and present yourself as an asylum seeker, putz.

They can also do that at the US Consulate in Mexico City, dipshit. People who cross into the US illegally are no different than wild dogs.

I suppose, but why does it matter if it's legal either way?

Dipshit, seeking asylum at the border is not crossing it illegally.

And even those who do try to cross illegally, they aren't dogs, they are still people and should be treated as such, especially in our justice system it's what separates the United States from the likes of Cuba, China, Saudi Arabia and others.

Dipshit, seeking asylum at the border BY crossing it without permission is still crossing it illegally.

There are procedures to get things done. Simply wandering in at-will isn't one of them.

"They aren't dogs". Straw man. This is not a binary choice between "let them in unhindered, or you think they're dogs". No one said they WERE dogs. If they were dogs, they wouldn't be nearly as problematic.

They ARE being treated as people; they are being treated as people who have broken the law. And implying that they are somehow being denied due process of law - let alone somehow being treated like lawbreakers in Cuba, China, and Saudi Arabia - is nothing short of libelous.

The more you try to assume moral superiority on this subject, the more you prove you're rancid pond scum.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump:

"If you are smuggling a child then we will prosecute you, and that child will be separated from you as required by law," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said Monday at a law enforcement conference in Scottsdale, Arizona. "If you don't like that, then don't smuggle children over our border."

Administration officials explained that the goal of the program is 100 percent prosecution of all who enter the U.S. illegally. When adults are prosecuted and jailed, their children will be separated from them, just as would happen for a U.S. citizen convicted and jailed.​

Anguish at Southwest border as more immigrant children are separated from parents

The Trump administration's willingness to take children from their parents has raised concerns about how far authorities should go to stem unauthorized border crossings and what human cost is acceptable in the name of border security and immigration control.

"There is something terrible happening here that Americans would not support if they understood it," said F. Scott McCown, director of the Children’s Rights Clinic at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law.​

I don't care how much you hate illegal immigrants this is EVIL. You are punishing the children. It's abhorrant and wrong and inexcusable. I hope they rot in hell for this. 700 children so far have been seperated from the only family they know and lost to our often incompetent and mismanaged child care system. I fail to see how any parent could support actions like these.

When parents are held for prosecution, their children are turned over to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, part of the Department of Health and Human Services. The children are then designated as "unaccompanied minors," and the government tries to connect them to family members who are already in the U.S. Until then, children wait in shelters or are sent to federally contracted foster homes, often without parents being told exactly where they are, immigration advocates said.

It may soon become even more difficult to place children with relatives. The Department of Homeland Security is proposing immigration checks be done on all people in a household who may take in these "unaccompanied" children, which means relatives who are undocumented may be less likely to come forward.

In the meantime, space in shelters and foster homes is limited; The Washington Post reported the administration plans to open facilities at military bases to house some of the separated children.​

Maybe obey our Laws and enter the Country legally? It's a thought.

I have no problem with that. I have no problem with a hearing and, if determined deportation.

Do you think it's necessary to inact this draconian policy in the meantime?

My understanding is that it would be inhumane to house small children in adult detention facilities with potential pedophiles or other serious criminals. Kind of makes sense doesn't? Would you want your 8 year old child housed in a maximum security prison with adult male inmates? My guess is probably not.

That is why kids are adults are separated. Plus...it is the Law. And we are a Nation of Laws or should be.

Actually, the real reason is that the left was coldbloodedly using these children as a means to back-door open border policy into practice without the messy entanglements of passing laws through the legislature and letting citizens have a say in it.

The policy we are discussing was THEIR idea, not ours, and was touted as "the only humane thing to do", and family detention was vilified as "eeeevil", for just as long as the government was willing to use it as an excuse to release the entire family and let them disappear.

Exactly. Coyote whining that we aren't equipped to deal with such a huge influx...NO SHIT.

They deliberately MADE us unable to deal with that huge influx, precisely because they wanted to leave us no option but to simply let adult illegals disappear into our country, never to be heard from again . . . unless and until they kill someone.

NOW they're screeching about the "eeeevils" of this policy THEY insisted on, not because they actually think it's bad, but because the government found a way to adhere to it that didn't involve releasing illegals in job lots.

They don't give a rat's ass about those kids. They're just trying to leave the Trump administration no ability to defend the border, and the kids are a handy tool to be used, yet again.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe obey our Laws and enter the Country legally? It's a thought.

I have no problem with that. I have no problem with a hearing and, if determined deportation.

Do you think it's necessary to inact this draconian policy in the meantime?

My understanding is that it would be inhumane to house small children in adult detention facilities with potential pedophiles or other serious criminals. Kind of makes sense doesn't? Would you want your 8 year old child housed in a maximum security prison with adult male inmates? My guess is probably not.

That is why kids are adults are separated. Plus...it is the Law. And we are a Nation of Laws or should be.

We are a nation of laws but we also can exercise discretion. Families don’t have to be housed in with serious offenders. Kids don’t have to be removed. We exercised this discretion before why not now?

Sorry, but thanks to you leftists, families can't be housed, period. In addition to demanding that kids had to be released IMMEDIATELY and couldn't be detained, leftists also insisted that family detention centers be shut down, because they were "eeeeevil". Don't even give me "we exercised this discretion before why not now". The reason why not is because it stopped fitting the left's ultimate, underhanded agenda. No other reason.

You lying sacks don't believe this policy is "eeevil and inhumane" now any more than you believed the exact reverse of it was "eeeevil and inhumane" back when THAT was your stated position. The truth is that you profess to believe whatever will get you closer to your goal of simply letting people wander across the border unimpeded, and **** honesty, facts, the rule of law, and the rights and desires of your fellow citizens. Your ends are so pure and noble and morally superior to everything that they justify any means, right?

Well, you hypocrites made this mess, and the rest of us are no longer even trying to follow the whiplash of your "THIS is moral NOW" course changes, and we sure as shit are not letting you get away with trying to blame President Trump for policies which 100% belong at YOUR doorstep. We have your number now, and you get to blame no one but yourselves.

And they continue to think that children are a suitable sacrifice to be made at the altar of globalism/communism.

Hey, those kids are lucky they aren't being sacrificed in the more literal fashion that the left applies at the altar of feminism.

 

[MisterBeale]

If I crossed into Mexico illegally with my kid, how would we be treated?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Coming here illegally isn't coming here legally. Now you know.

Asylum seekers who are also being separated from their children are coming here legally. It shouldn't be done with any families but especially not those that are following the rules. Please keep up.

Oh well.

I'm sure Taz will be delighted to know that you and him are simpatico on this issue.

There's a reason for separating the kids. The people trying to smuggle them in know that is what they are facing. For the most part, these are not safe people to leave children with..they tend not to really care what happens to them.

Most kids crossing the border with adults are their families, if there is reason to believe or those parents are unable to prove they are there kids than a simple DNA test will resolve that.

And the ones who are stellar wonderful parents who aren't traffickers or gang members or wanted for a crime somewhere..they will be reunited with their kids later. They knew that, they chose this route.

Shouldn't be separated in the first place. They knew what? That they are leaving literal death traps behind wanting a better life for them and their children, it's probably still worth the risk to seek asylum and you want them to pay some sort of emotional toll for it. Pretty sick.

You're making great points for Taz though, basically '**** them, make 'em pay'.

Most kids crossing the border with adults are their families, if there is reason to believe or those parents are unable to prove they are there kids than a simple DNA test will resolve that.

Sure, DNA tests are cheap and our wallet is wide open for these invaders.

Shouldn't be separated in the first place. They knew what? That they are leaving literal death traps behind wanting a better life for them and their children, it's probably still worth the risk to seek asylum and you want them to pay some sort of emotional toll for it. Pretty sick.

You're making great points for Taz though, basically '**** them, make 'em pay'.

They shouldn't be separated in the first place? Maybe it's better to say they shouldn't have come here in the first place.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sorry, I don't believe in open borders. And I don't believe in filling the country with unskilled workers. I didn't say we didn't need ANY, just not a free-for-all.

Nobody believes in open borders, can we finally kill that strawman? Like it or not, we need unskilled workers here, we don't have enough currently but you'd rather blabber about some idiotic notion that you don't believe in 'filling the country with unskilled workers', whatever that hell that means. Shit,who can argue with such a defined and well thought out position.

Hmmm. If we need unskilled workers so bad, I guess the 3.8% unemployed in our country must be skilled workers.

We need unskilled workers because we don't have enough of our own and as our population ages the need is only going to be greater. I've already provided links but you chose to ignore them and instead rely on your own xenophobia.

Yes, that's what it is, xenophobia. You must be desperate to use that worn out card.

Why else would you be against unskilled labor that we need? I'll await your non answer.

Because we don't need unskilled labor, we have plenty of our own.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Franco's been on my ignore list because he attacked my mother and my sister.

Then I'm afraid I have to inform you that you didn't miss anything.