USU78 Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 6 minutes ago, Danzo said: You are unaware of laws that are in conflict with each other? What field of law do you practice in? Where I practice you have to daily look at the decisions to see the conflicts in the laws being resolved. That's why I brought up the "sorry I broke your dock" example: people tie up boats in a storm without permission of the dock owner [arguably] to save lives and property. Sometimes those boats break things. The issue becomes whether one is responsible to pay for the broken dock. Link to comment
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 2 minutes ago, bluebell said: The whole system seems to be broken. It has been for a long time. What I have generally found is that those who defend the system are defending what they imagine the system to be, not what it actually is. No one seems to want to defend how it really works. One Example(That happened before Trump) We had a client (Legal, permanent resident) who married someone in mexico. His wife was an attorney with a practice in Mexico and didn't want to immigrate to america. She did want to visit. The US would not grant a tourist visa because she had a relative in the US. The only way this client could visit his wife was to go to Mexico. This client passed away from a heart attack. The US then decided to let his wife come for the funeral because she no longer had a relative in the US. Apparently it is bad for a husband and wife to visit but its OK to go to his funeral. How messed up! 1 Link to comment
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 10 minutes ago, Walden said: I don't consider Ben Shapiro a propagandist because he argues well, I admire his skills in that arena. Nor do I consider him a propagandist based solely on his political views, as there are many on the left whom I also consider propagandists. IMO, I consider Shapiro a propagandist because he creates a false narrative of the left being built on a hierarchy of "victimhood" and then goes on to rant loudly, and profitably, against this false narrative that he has constructed. It is not unlike the leftists propagandists who falsely construct a viewpoint of the extreme right as a hierarchy of the privileged, another false narrative. And yes, I regularly listen to Michael Medved, whom I can respect, as well as Mark Levin, whom I consider a bombastic flamethrower, as well as Larry Elder, who often seems in over his head and has neither the gift of argument possessed by Shapiro or the sensibility of Medved. Just don't report me to the ACLU, they may revoke my membership for listening to these conservative conspirators. Just in case you were unaware of him, I should like to direct your attention to Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report. This is an interview show, mostly. He has lefties, righties, and libbies on his show. One of his recent guests was Jenny Wilson, who is running as a Democrat against whoever it is gets the Republican Utah senate nod (Romney, I guess). Link to comment
USU78 Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 6 minutes ago, Danzo said: So you think it would be reasonable to reunite the children within a week on a charge (Not a conviction) of a class B misdemeanor that doesn't involve endangerment of a child? Did I say that the misdemeanor would be cleared in a weak? Not at all. What likely happens is the misdemeanant pleads NG w/i the week, then has the matter set for pretrial/discovery conference weeks or months later, and a trial set for whenever, possibly months down the road, if no deal can be cut at the pretrial. Reunion with the kids can become a real mess if the juvy courts get involved because the child(ren) are endangered by the misdemeanant's actions. You could see, potentially though rarely, a year or more go by before family reunification can happen under such circumstances. It's hard for me to get too excited about the present brouhaha because of having seen such things. It's the way our world works. 1 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, bluebell said: The whole system seems to be broken. It just is broken. No seeming about it. Congress is both unable and unwilling to truly tackle the issue due to impending mid-terms. The President is using it in a twisted hostage scenario and imagines he is winning a propaganda war. People get outraged in the short term and then forget about it. So called reformers talk about how they know we need to fix legal immigration and support reform for appearance reasons but when push comes to shove do nothing. Pedants insist on the rule of law while having no conception of what the law requires. Everyone thinks change needs to happen but no one cares enough to do it. Edited June 19, 2018 by The Nehor 2 Link to comment
mnn727 Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 1 hour ago, Gray said: Illegal immigration is a misdemeanor. That crime does not justify the Trump administration traumatizing children for life. It's inhuman and immoral. The parents are not justified in traumatizing children for life by bringing them illegally into another country. It's inhuman and immoral. 2 Link to comment
jkwilliams Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 1 minute ago, mnn727 said: The parents are not justified in traumatizing children for life by bringing them illegally into another country. It's inhuman and immoral. Depends. In some places, it would be far more traumatic to stay in their home countries. Honduras and El Salvador spring to mind. Either way, even granting that illegal immigration traumatizes children (a debatable issue), there's no justification for adding to the trauma. I saw a tour of one such facility, and there was a distraught toddler in the middle of a room full of kids. The staff member just stood there, trying to get her to take a child. She said she was not allowed to pick up the child or physically comfort her. That is nuts. Link to comment
mnn727 Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 1 hour ago, bluebell said: This seems like an approach that lacks mercy. That is the one reason that I can't get behind it. A of F 12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. Link to comment
mnn727 Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 Just now, jkwilliams said: Depends. In some places, it would be far more traumatic to stay in their home countries. Honduras and El Salvador spring to mind. Either way, even granting that illegal immigration traumatizes children (a debatable issue), there's no justification for adding to the trauma. I saw a tour of one such facility, and there was a distraught toddler in the middle of a room full of kids. The staff member just stood there, trying to get her to take a child. She said she was not allowed to pick up the child or physically comfort her. That is nuts. That supposed rule has been proven false. Stop buying the hype. Link to comment
jkwilliams Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 Just now, mnn727 said: A of F 12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. Sometimes the law is an ***. 1 Link to comment
jkwilliams Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 (edited) 1 minute ago, mnn727 said: That supposed rule has been proven false. Stop buying the hype. Then why did this idiot staff member say that? Either way, you have failed just to justify further traumatizing these kids. Edited June 19, 2018 by jkwilliams Link to comment
jkwilliams Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 And good for the church for taking a stand on this. The current rhetoric out of Washington is dehumanizing these folks. We are not "infested" with immigrants; they are people, not vermin. 1 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, mnn727 said: A of F 12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. -written by the head of a Church that secretly violated bigamy laws and that would later illegally immigrate en masse to another country in the following years. Then, after arriving, they joined their old nation in a war against their benefactor. Clearly this is more a guideline then a rule. 1 Link to comment
strappinglad Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 I recently heard that for the first couple of months of the current admin , the number of illegal border crossings dropped way off because of the uncertainty of the policy to be applied. If true, then perhaps the terrible conditions experienced by the immigrants in their home countries must also have eased off at the same time. Now we are told that the children are experiencing psychological damage by being separated from their parents and forced to stay in a place with their own bed, regular meals, fresh clothes etc. while the weeks of travel, sleeping rough, never knowing when there might be food and exposed to potential abuse and threats of violence was all just fun and games. 2 Link to comment
jkwilliams Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 1 minute ago, strappinglad said: I recently heard that for the first couple of months of the current admin , the number of illegal border crossings dropped way off because of the uncertainty of the policy to be applied. If true, then perhaps the terrible conditions experienced by the immigrants in their home countries must also have eased off at the same time. Now we are told that the children are experiencing psychological damage by being separated from their parents and forced to stay in a place with their own bed, regular meals, fresh clothes etc. while the weeks of travel, sleeping rough, never knowing when there might be food and exposed to potential abuse and threats of violence was all just fun and games. This kind of dismissive snark isn't helpful. Link to comment
The Nehor Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 12 minutes ago, mnn727 said: The parents are not justified in traumatizing children for life by bringing them illegally into another country. It's inhuman and immoral. Yeah, but they are not being inhuman while acting in my country’s name. People acting cruelly I accept as normality. When they do it while claiming to be acting in my name I get a bit salty. 1 Link to comment
USU78 Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, The Nehor said: -written by the head of a Church that secretly violated bigamy laws and that would later illegally immigrate en masse to another country in the following years. Then, after arriving, they joined their old nation in a war against their benefactor. Clearly this is more a guideline then a rule. A quibble: by July 1847 what became Utah was under control and administration of the US Military, with formal annexation occurring by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo the following year. Whether BY had obtained permission from the Mexican gov't prior to that time was mooted by events. Accordingly, you cannot really say the Mormons were illegal emigres from the US, as they were still in internationally recognized US territory at all times prior to the cessation of hostilities. Link to comment
jkwilliams Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 1 minute ago, The Nehor said: Yeah, but they are not being inhuman while acting in my country’s name. People acting cruelly I accept as normality. When they do it while claiming to be acting in my name I get a bit salty. What drives me crazy is the assumption that, if you don't support these draconian immigration policies, you're in favor of "open borders." Sane, sensible immigration enforcement does not require traumatizing kids. Link to comment
The Nehor Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, USU78 said: A quibble: by July 1847 what became Utah was under control and administration of the US Military, with formal annexation occurring by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo the following year. Whether BY had obtained permission from the Mexican gov't prior to that time was mooted by events. Accordingly, you cannot really say the Mormons were illegal emigres from the US, as they were still in internationally recognized US territory at all times prior to the cessation of hostilities. A minor quibble. It was US occupied territory and not internationally recognized. And calling Utah occupied is also a bit of a joke. No one except the Mormons cared about that godforsaken desert. 1 Link to comment
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 39 minutes ago, mnn727 said: The parents are not justified in traumatizing children for life by bringing them illegally into another country. It's inhuman and immoral. Sometimes they feel they have no other option. Link to comment
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 36 minutes ago, mnn727 said: A of F 12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. is this more or less important than Mathew 25 verse 40? Link to comment
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 21 minutes ago, USU78 said: A quibble: by July 1847 what became Utah was under control and administration of the US Military, with formal annexation occurring by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo the following year. Whether BY had obtained permission from the Mexican gov't prior to that time was mooted by events. Accordingly, you cannot really say the Mormons were illegal emigres from the US, as they were still in internationally recognized US territory at all times prior to the cessation of hostilities. The us did not restrict immigration at that time anyway. Restrictions on immigration didn't come later, I believe it was the Anti Chineese acts of the 1870s Link to comment
strappinglad Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 16 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: This kind of dismissive snark isn't helpful. Perhaps not, but if hundreds of arguably the " best and brightest " over the decades have been unable to formulate a good immigration law , what chance is there? What proposal do you have that would balance secure borders with compassion for those fleeing oppression ? 45 and the Congress is all hair and ears I'm sure. Again with the snark... sorry. Link to comment
ksfisher Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 14 hours ago, Maedros said: How do you (as a parent) put your children through such trauma knowing full well that you will separated from them or rather that they will be separated from you? How man? How? What kind of parents are these? Are you assuming that everyone "south of the border" is watching CNN? Link to comment
jkwilliams Posted June 19, 2018 Share Posted June 19, 2018 3 minutes ago, strappinglad said: Perhaps not, but if hundreds of arguably the " best and brightest " over the decades have been unable to formulate a good immigration law , what chance is there? What proposal do you have that would balance secure borders with compassion for those fleeing oppression ? 45 and the Congress is all hair and ears I'm sure. Again with the snark... sorry. No worries. I would support a guest-worker bill similar to the one in Utah (HB 116) that the church supported. The braceros program worked well for over 20 years. I don't understand why it has to be an all-or-nothing issue. Clearly, the current system isn't working. I doubt building a wall is going to change much but get some construction companies rich. Link to comment
Recommended Posts