Trump & Child Separation

This is the result of the zero tolerance change that Trump made. And he's ok with that. So are his supporters because these families are sub human to them.

Maybe Congress can take responsibility as a body and do their job... they could change the law by next week.

Trump isn't going to back down, the Dems want open borders, which breeds horrible crime....he's tired of the BS at the border and the horrific issues that have been going on for decades. Congress needs to get off their asses, rather than blaming the president.

DgI4wVzXUAAt8hy.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Still waiting for you to add anything of substance to the conversation.

Want some substance. Read this. Helps explain why what is being done is morally reprehensible and why hiding behind the "just following the law" argument is bs. This policy was created with the specific intent of creating a strong deterrent. And that strong deterrent was the morally reprehensible act of taking kids from parents. This is not an unintended side-effect of an otherwise morally good or even neutral shift in policy.

Principle of double effect - Wikipedia

Basic thrust:

The doctrine consists of four conditions that must be satisfied before an act is morally permissible:

The nature-of-the-act condition. The action must be either morally good or indifferent.
The means-end condition. The bad effect must not be the means by which one achieves the good effect.
The right-intention condition. The intention must be the achieving of only the good effect, with the bad effect being only an unintended side effect.
The proportionality condition. The bad effect must not be disproportionate to the good effect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Do you understand that the only photos that are getting out of those facilities are ones approved by the government? There certainly are confused and crying young children in those buildings who want to see their parents but we aren't going to see those pics. That would be bad press, after all.

Oh boo hoo hoo hoooo 😭😭😭 cry me a river....The parents are CRIMINALS. ILLEGALLY entering the country. We can not take everyone who wants to come here. Period. We can't afford it. They KNOW what's going to happen.

But YOU and LG and all the rest of you whiny ass libtards.....

Connect them back up with their parents then BB. YOU, go do it. YOU, go get it done.

Best way? At the border, 5 minutes after we catch excort them back into the country that allowed them safe passage through their country into ours. And with parents who brought them in. That, unless we can have reason to investigate whether or not human trafficking is happening.

I'm for sending them back immediately. Bang. Done. Not time at all where we have to house and feed them. I'm for having a heavy penalty on nations for every criminally tresspassing illegal alien we catch and can establish where they came from. A penalty heavy enough they have to decide it's cheaper to police their own borders than facilitate illegal entry into the US. We'll do the same on our side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Want some substance. Read this. Helps explain why what is being done is morally reprehensible and why hiding behind the "just following the law" argument is bs. This policy was created with the specific intent of creating a strong deterrent. And that strong deterrent was the morally reprehensible act of taking kids from parents. This is not an unintended side-effect of an otherwise morally good or even neutral shift in policy.

Principle of double effect - Wikipedia
Posting Wikipedia links is also BS.

I might just mosey on over there and give it an update...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Lol, back to this lying fraud. Here is some of the language in the bill allowing for separation:

But they can't send the kid to federal lockup and they are sending all illegals they catch to lockup.

Edit: And the child has been abused and neglected by their parents by the time they get to the border.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Want some substance. Read this. Helps explain why what is being done is morally reprehensible and why hiding behind the "just following the law" argument is bs. This policy was created with the specific intent of creating a strong deterrent. And that strong deterrent was the morally reprehensible act of taking kids from parents. This is not an unintended side-effect of an otherwise morally good or even neutral shift in policy.

Principle of double effect - Wikipedia

Basic thrust:

The doctrine consists of four conditions that must be satisfied before an act is morally permissible:

The nature-of-the-act condition. The action must be either morally good or indifferent.
The means-end condition. The bad effect must not be the means by which one achieves the good effect.
The right-intention condition. The intention must be the achieving of only the good effect, with the bad effect being only an unintended side effect.
The proportionality condition. The bad effect must not be disproportionate to the good effect.

Up your "morally reprehensible" goody two shoes BS. Catch em, return em to the country they crossed in from. THE WORLD'S POOR CAN NOT come here and get more money monthly than our own elderly get in SS checks each month.

That's frickin INSANE. So, evillawyer, (oh how the irony drips off your screen name) THAT is what is morally reprehensible.

Catch and return as fast as can be. Fewer meals, nights housed, court costs.

Get em outta here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Ironic facts...

Migrant children who cross into the United States either alone or with adults have a higher standard of living once they are put into federal care than the more than 13 million American children who are living in poverty across the country.

Each unaccompanied minor costs the federal government about $34,660 annually. This is a higher standard of living per child than the roughly 13 million American children who continue to live below the U.S. poverty line.

In 2016, there were about 13.2 million American children under the age of 18 living in poverty. These are U.S. children, for example, whose parents or guardians –in a household of four — earn less than $24,500 a year.

This annual income for an impoverished American family is $10,000 less than the more than $34,500 in federal funds which are spent on each unaccompanied minor border crosser.

Overall, about $1.4 billion is spent on unaccompanied minor border crossers every year, which American taxpayers foot the bill for...the comfortable living conditions that unaccompanied minor border crossers are placed into by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Those comfortable living conditions include lodging, meals, clothing, medical care, education, recreation, counseling, among other services.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
Ironic facts...

Migrant children who cross into the United States either alone or with adults have a higher standard of living once they are put into federal care than the more than 13 million American children who are living in poverty across the country.

Each unaccompanied minor costs the federal government about $34,660 annually. This is a higher standard of living per child than the roughly 13 million American children who continue to live below the U.S. poverty line.

In 2016, there were about 13.2 million American children under the age of 18 living in poverty. These are U.S. children, for example, whose parents or guardians –in a household of four — earn less than $24,500 a year.

This annual income for an impoverished American family is $10,000 less than the more than $34,500 in federal funds which are spent on each unaccompanied minor border crosser.

Overall, about $1.4 billion is spent on unaccompanied minor border crossers every year, which American taxpayers foot the bill for...the comfortable living conditions that unaccompanied minor border crossers are placed into by the Department of Health and Human Services.

Those comfortable living conditions include lodging, meals, clothing, medical care, education, recreation, counseling, among other services.

HEY! evil lawyer...FIX THIS!!!^^^^
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
Up your "morally reprehensible" goody two shoes BS. Catch em, return em to the country they crossed in from. THE WORLD'S POOR CAN NOT come here and get more money monthly than our own elderly get in SS checks each month.

That's frickin INSANE. So, evillawyer, (oh how the irony drips off your screen name) THATis what is morally reprehensible.

Catch and return as fast as can be. Fwer meals, nights housed, court costs.

Get em outta here.

So basic argument is F morality. They can go F themselves. We gotta take care of our own. Drop mic. And then you go support the further reduction or elimination of the very programs you invoked for why we shouldn't be helping immigrants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
Illegal immigration to the U.S. costs federal, state and local taxpayers a staggering net cost of roughly $116 billion a year...therefore, our president should announce that he is ending ALL welfare for Americans in order to cover the cost of the illegal 'invaders' (that word will really fire up the liberals and progressives! Lol) and watch as the entire Democrat voting block screams for an end to the illegal law breaking actions.

Ok progressive libby's, please reference the key word we are referencing: Illegal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Illegal immigration to the U.S. costs federal, state and local taxpayers a staggering net cost of roughly $116 billion a year...therefore, our president should announce that he is ending ALL welfare for Americans in order to cover the cost of the illegal 'invaders' (that word will really fire up the liberals and progressives! Lol) and watch as the entire Democrat voting block screams for an end to the illegal law breaking actions.

Ok progressive libby's, please reference the key word we are referencing: Illegal.

Thanks. I believe these stats come from FAIR, a recognized hate group.

Federation for American Immigration Reform | Southern Poverty Law Center
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Thanks. I believe these stats come from FAIR, a recognized hate group.

Federation for American Immigration Reform | Southern Poverty Law Center

lol. same idiotic response in a prior post if memeory serves.

they sure appear like a bunch of multi-cultural racists with uneducated, ill-informed and unjustified circum vitae's:

staff:

FAIR Staff | Federation for American Immigration Reform

board:

Board of Directors | Federation for American Immigration Reform

National Board of Advisors

  • Hon. Louis Barletta
  • Sharon Barnes
  • Gwat Bhattacharjie
  • Gerda Bikales
  • Hon. Brian Bilbray (Co-Chair)
  • J. Bayard Boyle, Jr.
  • Hugh Brien
  • John Brock
  • Pat Choate, Ph.D.
  • Donald Collins, Sr. (Co-Chair)
  • Clifford Colwell, M.D.
  • Thomas Connolly
  • Alfred P. Doyle, M.D.
  • Dino Drudi
  • Paul Egan
  • Captain Bob Eggle, USAR (Ret.)
  • Don Feder
  • Robert Gillespie
  • Joseph R. Guzzardi
  • Robert E. Hannay
  • Hessie Harris
  • Sheriff Tom Hodgson
  • Glenn Jackson
  • Carol Joyal
  • Hon. Richard Lamm
  • Roy C. Lierman
  • Donald Mann
  • Jack Martin
  • K.C. McAlpin
  • Joel McCleary
  • Scott McConnell
  • James G. McDonald, Esq.
  • Paul K. Nachman
  • Peter Nunez
  • Robert D. Park
  • Fred Pinkham, Ph.D.
  • Randy Pullen
  • Bruce S. Reid
  • Teela Roche
  • David P. Schippers, Esq.
  • Hon. Alan Simpson
  • John Philip Sousa, IV
  • John Tanton, M.D.
  • Alan N. Weeden
  • Hon. Curtin Winsor, Jr.


What We Believe

Immigration, within proper limits, can be positive. Adhering to the rule of law is central to successful assimilation and citizenship.

Tough decisions require strong leadership. Strong leadership, in turn, is underscored by defined principles that anchor public policy.

Immigration can be an emotional topic: We believe in respecting the basic human rights and the dignity of all involved. As such, FAIR opposes policies based on favoritism toward, or discrimination against, any person based on race, color, religion, or gender.

We understand that under any rational system of ordered entry, the demand will always vastly exceed available slots. Tough decisions will therefore always be necessary.


checkmate?


board-directors
 
Last edited:
So basic argument is F morality. They can go F themselves. We gotta take care of our own. Drop mic. And then you go support the further reduction or elimination of the very programs you invoked for why we shouldn't be helping immigrants.

I never said or implied that in any way. How you can be so doltish is amazing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

VN Store



Back
Top