Just to stir the pudding...

[suncowiam]

Never said use of emotion was new or unusual



I can not fix what is most likely a subjective perception applied to anyone on a whim.



Pediatricians do not create law. More so their view would extend into other crimes causing separation. By this logic a criminal just needs to have a child by which to pull your heart strings.



What scenario would that be since I never mentioned one? I only questioned how you are keeping "score"



Meh. It had fair less of an impact than typical American methods of invasion, coups and funneling money to dissident groups.



You think I ignored Trumps use of emotions?

Beside the first reply the rest of your comment seems to be projection of mind rather than anything I said.

But you only quoted part of my comments.

I repeated much of what I already said

Courts do consider the context of children for US citizens before handing down verdicts. So US parental criminals also are judged differently.

 

[Shad]

But you only quoted part of my comments.

Yes as it was the point I wanted to address.

I repeated much of what I already said

So? You still failed to consider anything outside what you have been told and repeated.

Courts do consider the context of children for US citizens before handing down verdicts. So US parental criminals also are judged differently.

This was not part of the logic you used before.

Now think about the difference and why. *Hint* Information and databases of it.

 

[suncowiam]

Yes as it was the point I wanted to address.



So? You still failed to consider anything outside what you have been told and repeated.



This was not part of the logic you used before.

Now think about the difference and why. *Hint* Information and databases of it.

What is it exactly are you pointing out?

That emotional appeal is a fallacy? I already agreed to that.

 

[metis]

Very simple solution: don't try to enter the country illegally. Problem solved.

Should that also have applied for the many who came from Europe and took the lands away from those whom were here before, namely the Amerindians? And should that also have applied later when Americans took by force the American southwest from the Spanish?

If you are of European ancestry, let me suggest that you leave and let those who were here first have the land you are on.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But...but...you didn't post the entire article. If you had you would have noted that the US Embassy can grant you refuge and protection if you were truly in need of asylum. Being that these folks at the border did not try this route first may indicate that they wish to sneak into another country for maybe more self-centered reasons. You're being played.

An embassy isn’t required to accept refugees. (Edit: and from what I gather, it's a pretty rare situation for a US embassy to give sanctuary to a refugee who isn't an American citizen.)

Countries that have adopted the Refugee Convention are generally required to accept them if they show up in the country and ask for asylum (whether at a port of entry or somewhere else). Refugees are also protected from prosecution for entering the country by illegal means.

 

[BSM1]

Should that also have applied for the many who came from Europe and took the lands away from those whom were here before, namely the Amerindians? And should that also have applied later when Americans took by force the American southwest from the Spanish?

If you are of European ancestry, let me suggest that you leave and let those who were here first have the land you are on.

And should the "Amerinds" give the land back to the deer and the antelope? What a ridiculous argument.

An embassy isn’t required to accept refugees. (Edit: and from what I gather, it's a pretty rare situation for a US embassy to give sanctuary to a refugee who isn't an American citizen.)

Countries that have adopted the Refugee Convention are generally required to accept them if they show up in the country and ask for asylum (whether at a port of entry or somewhere else). Refugees are also protected from prosecution for entering the country by illegal means.

And sovereign nations who have not accepted such a self defeating convention are not required to accept illegal aliens.

 

[metis]

And should the "Amerinds" give the land back to the deer and the antelope? What a ridiculous argument.

It's not at all a "ridiculous argument" when one looks at this from the perspective of history, nor is it a "ridiculous argument" if one realizes the vast majority of these people coming out of Central America have significant amounts of Amerindian ancestry.

What truly is a "ridiculous argument" is when it's based on an ignorance of the background of these situations and then blaming the victims. A large cause of this problem is the drug trafficking, whereas most of the illegal drugs are being bought by North Americans. To blame those seeking asylum because of what's going on there not only is a "ridiculous argument", it also misses the mark as to what are the primary causes.

 

[BSM1]

It's not at all a "ridiculous argument" when one looks at this from the perspective of history, nor is it a "ridiculous argument" if one realizes the vast majority of these people coming out of Central America have significant amounts of Amerindian ancestry.

What truly is a "ridiculous argument" is when it's based on an ignorance of the background of these situations and then blaming the victims. A large cause of this problem is the drug trafficking, whereas most of the illegal drugs are being bought by North Americans. To blame those seeking asylum because of what's going on there not only is a "ridiculous argument", it also misses the mark as to what are the primary causes.

Following your logic we should give Israel back to the Palestinians, or South Africa back to whatever indigenous tribe was there a couple of hundred years ago. BTW, I am not blaming the illegal aliens of any law breaking other than trying to breach the borders of a sovereign country in complete defiance of the laws of said country.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And sovereign nations who have not accepted such a self defeating convention are not required to accept illegal aliens.

Only a handful of nations haven't accepted them. The United States certainly did.

 

[metis]

Following your logic we should give Israel back to the Palestinians, or South Africa back to whatever indigenous tribe was there a couple of hundred years ago.

I did not say nor imply that, so what you've done is to slip into dualistic thinking. Instead of jumping to conclusions, why didn't you actually ask what I would propose?

BTW, I am not blaming the illegal aliens of any law breaking other than trying to breach the borders of a sovereign country in complete defiance of the laws of said country.

They are not to be considered "illegal aliens" unless they've been processed. Seeking refuge in another country on an emergency basis is not only acceptable under international law but also American law. According to an ICE spokesman, about half of these people trying to get into the U.S. would be considered "refugees", not "illegal aliens". This processing is so slow, this has forced the issue to trey and get across anyway possible. Mexico is very much helping them but that's not enough to handle the flow.

If you had children in these kind of dire straights, what would you do-- just let them be raped or forced into slavery or sex-traffickers? Why do you think so many refugees have fled into Europe? Why did so many Jews try to flee out of Europe in the 30's and 40's? Why did so many Europeans flee Europe to come to the Americas starting in the 1500's?

What both the Trump and previous administrations have been doing is to treat the symptoms but not the cause, and until the latter is dealt with properly this problem will probably linger for generations.

 

[Revoltingest]

Should that also have applied for the many who came from Europe and took the lands away from those whom were here before, namely the Amerindians? And should that also have applied later when Americans took by force the American southwest from the Spanish?

If you are of European ancestry, let me suggest that you leave and let those who were here first have the land you are on.

It's often alluded to that historical injustices of conquest should all be rectified in the
most extreme fashion today. But we don't do that, so it's justification for....hmmm......
....just what is it justification for? What kind of border security do you advocate?

 

[Milton Platt]

Crying girl in iconic image was never separated from mother, ICE says

The photo was compiled from two separate photos, so I figured that may be the case. In the original, the child appeared to be standing next to the mother. I think poetic license is allowed. They were just making a point.

 

[BSM1]

The photo was compiled from two separate photos, so I figured that may be the case. In the original, the child appeared to be standing next to the mother. I think poetic license is allowed. They were just making a point.

A lie is a lie...

 

[Milton Platt]

A lie is a lie...

So one should never be allowed to edit or photoshop a photo in any way?

 

[metis]

A lie is a lie...

And you're concerned about that but support Trump because... ?

 

[Shad]

What is it exactly are you pointing out?

Reread my comment

 

[Revoltingest]

And you're concerned about that but support Trump because... ?

Are you arguing that if Trump is a liar,
then lying about him is proper?

 

[BSM1]

So one should never be allowed to edit or photoshop a photo in any way?

Not when you use the altered photo or text to rile up the public against a non-existent situation. That's usually known as fraud.

 

[Milton Platt]

Not when you use the altered photo or text to rile up the public against a non-existent situation. That's usually known as fraud.

Are you saying that children were not being separated from their parents? That is the situation the photo represented.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Not when you use the altered photo or text to rile up the public against a non-existent situation. That's usually known as fraud.

Do you think anyone genuinely believed that this particular little girl was stood next to Trump on the cover of Time Magazine?