The Nehor Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 8 minutes ago, jpv said: I totally agree with it too, but why is it that so many people are against the Church speaking out politically only when they disagree with what's being said. The long version of the answer to that is complicated. I prefer the short answer: idolatry.
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 1 hour ago, Rajah Manchou said: That's fine, and its good to get Shapiro's perspective on it. But you said the reason the big furor has erupted is because the media hates Trump. I think furor has erupted because the first report that most heard about this issue was about Federal officials losing track of nearly 1500 children, and some of those were turned over to smugglers or human traffickers. That's what bothers me about this story. If that reporting was untrue, or the result of leftist hatred, please let me know. The media does hate Trump! Can you doubt it? And if the media reports that Trump has lost 1500 kids, like they checked his pockets and they weren't there any longer, then instant furor must prevail. Although there used to be a tradition of investigative journalism, nowadays they apparently only investigate so far until they can find something to run screaming about. I thought that was a pretty bad thing, too, and it worried me. Upon further investigation, I found that the 1500 children didn't get lost because they slipped through the floorboards in the custodial facility. As I mentioned, the policy in case of those parents whose cases were not going quickly was to give them into the custody of other family members. The 1500 children that got lost were the ones the feds handed out to their apparent next of kin who were already in-country. They got "lost" because those custodians failed to report back with the kids. Presumably because they were trying to avoid ICE deporting them. There are so many aspects to this that the so-called journalists are either willfully ignoring, or just don't care about. The previous policy of non-prosecution, especially in the cases where children were involved, had as a direct result more child trafficking. If you listened to the video, it was mentioned that Mexican drug cartels were sending operatives across the border with children not their own, just to take advantage of the policy of non-enforcement in those cases. Were these children orphans, abductees, or were they bought and paid for? There's a lot of bad things happening on the border, and it isn't by any stretch of the imagination just Trump's enforcement of the border crossing laws. By the way, I don't trust what the media says any more. About anything. Especially when it's about politics. If they reported that the sky was blue on any given day, I tend to want to verify this with either eyewitness testimony, or a NOAA weather report. 1
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said: Just out of curiosity, do you accept the church's position on immigration? If not, do you view your sharing your opinions of disagreement as being a disloyal or loyal opposition? Don't know what the position is. I clicked on the link, but I'm in Europe, and EU laws prohibit my looking at a website that doesn't conform to EU data protection laws. This one doesn't. Well, I might not be prohibited from it, but Fox news is apparently forbidden from letting me see it. Generally, I believe the Church has a right to its opinion on political matters. Whether I agree or disagree with its opinion is neither loyal nor disloyal. What I am certain of is that Jesus is the Christ, the son of the Eternal God, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the restored Church of Jesus Christ, and Russell M. Nelson is a prophet of God. And I don't like it that families are separated like that. But I think this matter is faaaarrrrr more complicated than it is simple. Edited June 19, 2018 by Stargazer 1
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 2 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said: I'd consider that even-handed too. But you are talking about the guy who wrote: (1) How to Debate Leftists and Destroy Them (2) Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future (3) Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV (4) Bullies: How the Left's Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences Americans Yeah, but so what? Is any of it true? Does he advocate jailing people who disagree with him? You act like having a strong opinion and advocating for it is a bad thing.
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Gray said: Also, I didn't watch the youtube video. I'm not into watching radical youtube pundits. No offense. I will read stuff by reasonable conservatives. OK, I'll bite. Name me a "reasonable" conservative whose stuff you will read. Although I do wonder why you consider Shapiro to be radical. Edited June 19, 2018 by Stargazer
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 1 hour ago, Danzo said: One of the problems with this issue is that people who call themselves conservatives, for some reason have adopted the big brother, big government, police state response to immigration instead of the small government, free market solution. I don't really think these people understand or even know what the free market means. If you give government the power to separate children from their families at the boarder for misdemeanors, you are giving the government the power to separate children from parents for other reasons reasons. It's almost like they are too stupid to know that once you give government this kind of power, it will be extremely difficult to take it away. You're right that some of them may not understand what the free market is. But I think your statement casts too wide a blanket. I would modify this to "some people who call themselves conservatives, for some reason have adopted the big brother, big government, police state response to immigration instead of the small government, free market solution." But you may be confusing conservatives and libertarians. And I would be interested to hear about any small government and free market solution. The problem with border issues is that the core libertarian value on this is Open Borders. I was a long-time Libertarian Party member, and I remember plenty of discussion on this principle. Unfortunately, an open border is an invitation to disaster.
Walden Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 8 minutes ago, Stargazer said: Yeah, but so what? Is any of it true? Does he advocate jailing people who disagree with him? You act like having a strong opinion and advocating for it is a bad thing. I think what Rajah Manchou was pointing out was the curious method of railing against politicized, leftist propaganda as news by utilizing the argument of a rightist propagandist like Ben Shapiro. IMO, extremes on both sides should be avoided when discerning facts. I used to listen to Shapiro every day on the radio when he was on the local conservative talk radio station here in the Los Angeles area. For a bleeding heart liberal, I spend a lot of time listening to conservative talk radio, as I find it both entertaining and enlightening. Regarding a source of what I consider even-handed news and commentary, I like to read The Economist. I know some consider it more left-leaning than centrist, but it seems to appease and infuriate me in equal measure. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted June 19, 2018 Author Posted June 19, 2018 14 minutes ago, Stargazer said: Don't know what the position is. I clicked on the link, but I'm in Europe, and EU laws prohibit my looking at a website that doesn't conform to EU data protection laws. This one doesn't. Well, I might not be prohibited from it, but Fox news is apparently forbidden from letting me see it. Generally, I believe the Church has a right to its opinion on political matters. Whether I agree or disagree with its opinion is neither loyal nor disloyal. What I am certain of is that Jesus is the Christ, the son of the Eternal God, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the restored Church of Jesus Christ, and Russell M. Nelson is a prophet of God. Here's what they said... Quote “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has long expressed its position that immigration reform should strengthen families and keep them together,” the Church said. “The forced separation of children from their parents now occurring at the U.S.-Mexico border is harmful to families, especially to young children. We are deeply troubled by the aggressive and insensitive treatment of these families.” https://www.lds.org/church/news/church-calls-for-unity-compassion-in-new-statement-on-immigration?lang=eng I agree with your position on loyalty. I asked because I'm continually being called disloyal when I disagree with the church's political statements about same sex marriage. Pres. Oaks famously gave a talk in which he stated there was no such thing as loyal opposition in the church which I found to be an extremely unbending as if clearly defining the demarcation line.
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 41 minutes ago, Danzo said: Actually, people illegally cross at legal border crossing all of the time. My wife crossed at a legal border crossing without a visa (she wasn't legal). The border guard let her come without checking her papers. (Of course she came here so she could serve a mission after praying if it was the right thing to do. It would seem that God sometimes authorizes people to do things that might be otherwise illegal). Uh, I think you were answering something that wasn't asked. By legal border crossing I don't think we mean illegally crossing a point of entry. Or maybe we do, but the border guard just waving her through does not mean she legally crossed the... wait a minute. Are you trying to confuse me? Because you're succeeding! <thinks a minute> No, your wife was crossing the border illegally. The fact that it was at a legal border crossing point (i.e. an official point of entry), and the border official didn't check her papers does not affect the deal one way or another. There.
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 42 minutes ago, Danzo said: One of the signs of bad law is that it will be arbitrarily enforced. Currently immigration law is selectively enforced because it is a bad law. It was designed to be selectively enforced. It always has been selectively enforced and despite what you see in the news, it is still being selectively enforced by Donald Trump (as it was with Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Kennedy, etc.) Well, that sucks. 1
Stargazer Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 9 minutes ago, Walden said: I think what Rajah Manchou was pointing out was the curious method of railing against politicized, leftist propaganda as news by utilizing the argument of a rightist propagandist like Ben Shapiro. I gather than you think anyone who argues well and with whom you disagree is a propagandist? 9 minutes ago, Walden said: IMO, extremes on both sides should be avoided when discerning facts. I used to listen to Shapiro every day on the radio when he was on the local conservative talk radio station here in the Los Angeles area. For a bleeding heart liberal, I spend a lot of time listening to conservative talk radio, as I find it both entertaining and enlightening. Do you listen to Michael Medved at all? 9 minutes ago, Walden said: Regarding a source of what I consider even-handed news and commentary, I like to read The Economist. I know some consider it more left-leaning than centrist, but it seems to appease and infuriate me in equal measure. On the odd occasion I have read it, I have enjoyed it, too. I think I may actually buy a subscription now that I am retired and have some time on my hands. And having said this, I just realized that I have spent waaaaay too many hours on this board today, and have gotten absolutely nothing useful done. Except for annoying people who disagree with me! I'll probably wake up tomorrow morning with twenty notifications on my little bell up there. Sigh. I'm my own worst enemy sometimes...
cinepro Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 1 hour ago, Danzo said: I don't really think these people understand or even know what the free market means. If you give government the power to separate children from their families at the boarder for misdemeanors, you are giving the government the power to separate children from parents for other reasons reasons. It's almost like they are too stupid to know that once you give government this kind of power, it will be extremely difficult to take it away. Danzo, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but the US government already has the power to "separate children from their families", and it does so all the time. Right now, thousands upon thousands of children who are US citizens have been removed from the custody of their parents, or their parents have been taken away from them. This has been going on for centuries. While this discussion (about the separations at the border) has some different wrinkles and ramifications based on the situations in which the separations are occurring, there is no reason to oppose it on the grounds that it grants the government some new power.
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 (edited) 37 minutes ago, Stargazer said: Uh, I think you were answering something that wasn't asked. By legal border crossing I don't think we mean illegally crossing a point of entry. Or maybe we do, but the border guard just waving her through does not mean she legally crossed the... wait a minute. Are you trying to confuse me? Because you're succeeding! <thinks a minute> No, your wife was crossing the border illegally. The fact that it was at a legal border crossing point (i.e. an official point of entry), and the border official didn't check her papers does not affect the deal one way or another. There. Of course it was illegal. But it was right. Gods laws will always trump mans laws. ETA: I don't blame you for being confused when we were fixing her status, the officer was confused as well. Apparently they didn't have a box to check for that option. "Being allowed in by the border patrol without actually being legal" Edited June 19, 2018 by Danzo 1
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 38 minutes ago, Stargazer said: You're right that some of them may not understand what the free market is. But I think your statement casts too wide a blanket. I would modify this to "some people who call themselves conservatives, for some reason have adopted the big brother, big government, police state response to immigration instead of the small government, free market solution." But you may be confusing conservatives and libertarians. And I would be interested to hear about any small government and free market solution. The problem with border issues is that the core libertarian value on this is Open Borders. I was a long-time Libertarian Party member, and I remember plenty of discussion on this principle. Unfortunately, an open border is an invitation to disaster. Basic Economics. You can restrict supply by quota, or you can restrict supply by market. So Called "Conservatives" have chosen quota over the market.
CA Steve Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, cinepro said: Danzo, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but the US government already has the power to "separate children from their families", and it does so all the time. Right now, thousands upon thousands of children who are US citizens have been removed from the custody of their parents, or their parents have been taken away from them. This has been going on for centuries. While this discussion (about the separations at the border) has some different wrinkles and ramifications based on the situations in which the separations are occurring, there is no reason to oppose it on the grounds that it grants the government some new power. For an example of that very thing happening we can look back at 2008 when the state authorities in Texas removed 400 children from the FLDS compound in Eldorado Texas. See here.
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 3 minutes ago, cinepro said: Danzo, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but the US government already has the power to "separate children from their families", and it does so all the time. Right now, thousands upon thousands of children who are US citizens have been removed from the custody of their parents, or their parents have been taken away from them. This has been going on for centuries. While this discussion (about the separations at the border) has some different wrinkles and ramifications based on the situations in which the separations are occurring, there is no reason to oppose it on the grounds that it grants the government some new power. It is rare that government will separate children from their families for a first office of a class B misdemeanor.
Gray Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 54 minutes ago, Stargazer said: OK, I'll bite. Name me a "reasonable" conservative whose stuff you will read. Although I do wonder why you consider Shapiro to be radical. John McCain. Laura Bush. 1
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, CA Steve said: For an example of that very thing happening we can look back at 2008 when the state authorities in Texas removed 400 children from the FLDS compound in Eldorado Texas. See here. It wasn't a Class "B" misdemeanor that those people were accused of.
Gray Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 1 hour ago, Stargazer said: There is no law mandating prosecution for legal border crossing. I can say that in full confidence! I don't know if I can say the same for an illegal border crossing, however. Can you? I think a CFR for a negative statement like this is a request to prove a negative -- unless there's an explicit law that says there's no mandate. Can you cite one? No, it doesn't work that way. The CFR would have to go to the opposite claim - that there is a law on the books mandating separation of children from parents at border crossings. Can you cite one?
Gray Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Stargazer said: I gather that the process of prosecution in these cases is carried out quite quickly, and doesn't require lengthy separation, unless the parent is wanted for other crimes, or claims asylum. If the process is less palatable than simple deportation, and less convenient, perhaps there is a message that needs to be sent: "Stop crossing the border illegally!" Are you sure about that latter case? If you watched the video, Shapiro quotes or at least refers to the cases where a person shows up the point of entry and claims asylum. They are not separated from their children, in that case, for one thing because they haven't broken the law. But if they cross illegally, they have broken the law, and then claiming asylum is seen as a sham. "I got caught, so now I'm going to try to sidestep the law by claiming something that may or may not be true, in the hope that that might derail my prosecution." Does the police officer let you off from speeding just because you say that your speedometer is broken? https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/trump-admin-discussed-separating-moms-kids-deter-asylum-seekers-feb-n884371 According to NBC, asylum seekers are also being separated from their children. This is a deliberate Trump administration policy. Quote Are you aware that by definition a misdemeanor is classified as an offense that cannot result in an incarceration longer than a year? An offense that can result in an incarceration of a year or more is a felony. But you could theoretically be sentenced up to one year in jail for a misdemeanor, and this would naturally separate you from your children. One of my sons pled guilty to misdemeanor reckless driving, and didn't serve a day in jail -- because his sentence was suspended for two years. If he so much as got a parking ticket during that two years, the judge told him he was going to go to jail, but thankfully he kept his nose clean -- or at least didn't get caught. What you seem to want is for certain crimes to be treated as "catch and release". You're entitled to your opinion, but I beg to differ. So, it's okay for your sons to avoid jail time, but not Hispanic immigrants? Why is that? Quote So, you're saying that Trump doesn't care about law and order; he just hates children. Is that what you're saying? Trump doesn't care about children. He's a sociopath. In fact he's advocated murdering children many times. Quote Further, what law has Trump broken? I know he has offended people, including me; he is constantly saying stupid things, and has even done some stupid things, but to the best of my knowledge he has broken no laws. Please don't try to bring up things for which there have been no indictment, let alone adjudication. And attacking law enforcement? Even Obama did that, but were you complaining about it then? Laws against self-dealing (Trump charities), laws against obstruction of justice (which he has broken openly), laws against espionage and treason (currently under investigation), laws again money laundering, laws against sexual assault... to name just a few. Quote "Specifically targeting children" is a very fraught way to put it, is it not? I'd entertain this claim as a possibility if the policy was to prosecute the illegals who had children with them, but not to prosecute those who didn't have children with them. But that's not happening, is it? Perhaps the Trump administration is specifically targeting illegal border crossers? Or is that too neutral for you, and not sufficiently anti-Trump? He's specifically targeting children. That's the reality. Quote When the police jail offenders do you say that they are specifically targeting their children? Because surely they know about the kids, and know that if they are jailed the children have to be put into someone's custody, right? It is true that the children are put into a bad place, but are they being put into a bad place because of Trump, or because of their own parents choie to break the law? Is the Trump administration being cruel? I understand that the Obama administration might have trod more lightly than Trump does in regard to this law. For some people Trump can do no wrong; for others he can do right. I'm in the middle. I believe he must enforce the laws, or else why do we even have laws? If the current law seems unjust, or unnecessarily cruel, which it might be, then Congress can change the bloody law. This has nothing to do with law enforcement. Trump is choosing to harm children. Quote It's all semantics for you people, isn't it? By "you people", do you mean people with a moral compass? Quote Children get mistreated on the southern border by the mere fact of their being dragged through the trackless desert by persons who appear to have no genuine interest in their welfare, as evidenced by those children who die from exposure due to improper preparation for the hazards, and potential abandonment by the very coyotes whom their parents paid exorbitantly to get them across, but who flee at the first sign of discovery. Deaths along the southern border is a significant hazard to those children. If you were to take your children on a desert trek across the Mojave desert without sufficient preparation, and without a means to call for help, and something happened to put them in jeopardy that could be traced to your negligence, law enforcement would come down on top of you like a ton of bricks, and your fight to get your kids back from Child Protective Services would be quite a sight to see. So don't try to accuse Donald Trump of mistreating children. This is vile victim blaming. Trump is the one putting kids in concentration camps - and has plans to house more in tents in 105 degree weather. Quote I find this uproaringly funny: "Blackmail congress into giving him his wall." What are presidents supposed to do when Congress won't give them the laws that they want, or what is Congress supposed to do to get the President to sign a law he doesn't want? Vetoes and overrides; poison pen clauses; vote trades; a thousand different strategies get deployed to accomplish what politicians want to get done. Not this. No previous president has acted like this. Are you trying to gaslight or are you just misinformed? Quote And don't tell me that Trump is the first president to blackmail congress. Every darned Congress that ever faced a hostile president, and every darned President who faced a hostile congress. What you seem to believe is that when the side that you favor does what it needs to do to get its policies enacted that's fair dinkum, but when the other side does it, that's bloody murder. Perhaps you're not so blind as that. CFR. Let's see a comparable example. Quote At least one President is trying to get done what he promised to do before he got elected. At least Trump's trying his darnedest to build that wall. I am ambivalent about whether it's a good idea or not, but I remember Obama and his closing of Guantanamo. Good idea or not, he reneged on that without much in the way of fanfare. You can make these kind of complaints about every governmental chief executive that has ever held office. They will always rile up those who have an axe to grind. You can only please part of the people; you can't please them all. Sorry, Trump is the most lawless, corrupt and anti-American president in our nation's history. There isn't even a close second place contender. Edited June 19, 2018 by Gray
USU78 Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 11 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? Is poverty so grinding that you'd rather traumatize your kids for a piece of bread? Is it really that bad in Mexico and how in heavens name do they get through Mexico from further South? What is the Mexican government doing about it? How is it an American issue, geez, no one is criticizing Mexico or Latin American governments and parents. The Dons in Mexico have much to answer for. 1
USU78 Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 1 hour ago, Danzo said: Actually, people illegally cross at legal border crossing all of the time. My wife crossed at a legal border crossing without a visa (she wasn't legal). The border guard let her come without checking her papers. (Of course she came here so she could serve a mission after praying if it was the right thing to do. It would seem that God sometimes authorizes people to do things that might be otherwise illegal). The "Kill Laban" mandate is a rare thing, and I fully believe it applies here, to her.
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, Gray said: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/trump-admin-discussed-separating-moms-kids-deter-asylum-seekers-feb-n884371 According to NBC, asylum seekers are also being separated from their children. This is a deliberate Trump administration policy. So, it's okay for your sons to avoid jail time, but not Hispanic immigrants? Why is that? Trump doesn't care about children. He's a sociopath. In fact he's advocated murdering children many times. Laws against self-dealing (Trump charities), laws against obstruction of justice (which he has broken openly), laws against espionage and treason (currently under investigation), laws again money laundering, laws against sexual assault... to name just a few. He's specifically targeting children. That's the reality. This has nothing to do with law enforcement. Trump is choosing to harm children. By "you people", do you mean people with a moral compass? This is vile victim blaming. Trump is the one putting kids in concentration camps - and has plans to house more in tents in 105 degree weather. Not this. No previous president has acted like this. Are you trying to gaslight or are you just misinformed? CFR. Let's see a comparable example. Sorry, Trump is the most lawless, corrupt and anti-American president in our nation's history. There isn't even a close second place contender. I don't think it is very useful to blame the immigration problem all on Trump. These laws have been around for quite some time. Both Democrats and Republicans have avoided addressing the issue when they have had the opportunity. The truth is, these people don't vote so no one has much to gain by actually addressing their problems. Trump may be making the problem more visible (He might just do some good there, despite his best efforts), But he didn't create america's Evil Immigration laws. 1
Danzo Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 6 minutes ago, USU78 said: The Dons in Mexico have much to answer for. There are many who will have much to answer for.
Gray Posted June 19, 2018 Posted June 19, 2018 Just now, Danzo said: I don't think it is very useful to blame the immigration problem all on Trump. These laws have been around for quite some time. Both Democrats and Republicans have avoided addressing the issue when they have had the opportunity. The truth is, these people don't vote so no one has much to gain by actually addressing their problems. Trump may be making the problem more visible (He might just do some good there, despite his best efforts), But he didn't create america's Evil Immigration laws. Trump is the one who created the immigration policy. It has nothing to do with the law. This is a specific policy his administration created. It's fair to give them credit for what they created. Immigration reform is another issue. Yes, it also needs work. But Trump's policy is actively and deliberately evil.
Recommended Posts