User Tag List

Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 1234512 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 202

Thread: Trump says he won't sign legislation banning separation of children from parents

  1. #16
    TOL Legend The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,053
    Thanks
    181
    Thanked 2,887 Times in 1,924 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    372012
    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    Um, no. It's the Democrats who actually have a sizable minority who'd like to repeal the Second Amendment.
    List and policy statements to that effect would improve your credibility. How many democrats have said what Trump said, or anything close to it? There may be some democrat somewhere in office who wants to end the 2nd Amendment, but here we have the head of the republican party asserting that we can just shove it aside:

    Trump's approach to the 2nd Amendment:
    "I like taking guns away early," Trump said. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (June 16th, 2018),Foxfire (June 16th, 2018)

  3. #17
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    12,840
    Thanks
    7,396
    Thanked 9,003 Times in 4,985 Posts

    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147731
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Of course. As you know, that never happened in the last administration. It was imposed by Sessions. The White House staff was once again forced to admit that there was no basis at all to Trump's claim. He was responsible for taking children from parents, and he could end it tomorrow if he wanted to.

    His statement that he would not sign a bill protecting children from being seized and separated from their parents makes it clear that it's his policy.

    Republicans in Congress are afraid that the democrats will take this to the voters in the fall elections. And they should.

    So keep your candles burning

    a.k.a. starchild, starburst, stardust, sweetpea, and dumber than dirt.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to annabenedetti For Your Post:

    Rusha (June 16th, 2018)

  5. #18
    Over 750 post club Idolater's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    965
    Thanks
    113
    Thanked 163 Times in 139 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    19592
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    List and policy statements to that effect would improve your credibility. How many democrats have said what Trump said, or anything close to it? There may be some democrat somewhere in office who wants to end the 2nd Amendment
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-percent-demo/
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    , but here we have the head of the republican party asserting that we can just shove it aside:

    Trump's approach to the 2nd Amendment:
    "I like taking guns away early," Trump said. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."
    What the president expressed there, infringes the right.
    "Those who believe in Christ" are all the Christians, Catholic or not.

    @Nee_Nihilo

  6. #19
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    23,121
    Thanks
    14,218
    Thanked 36,580 Times in 18,247 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147798
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusha View Post
    Lie ... IF he hated it, it wouldn't be happening. Intentionally inflicting harm on children due to hatred of their parents is NOT prolife or pro-child.
    Lie....it's the Democrates who keep these long standing problems from being solved.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    lifeisgood (June 21st, 2018)

  8. #20
    TOL Legend The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,053
    Thanks
    181
    Thanked 2,887 Times in 1,924 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    372012
    Barbarian suggests:
    List and policy statements to that effect would improve your credibility. How many democrats have said what Trump said, or anything close to it? There may be some democrat somewhere in office who wants to end the 2nd Amendment

    Quote Originally Posted by Idolater View Post
    Fully 21 percent of Americans think the same way. That’s according to a poll taken back in February by the Economist/YouGov.
    So a sizable minority of Americans agree with Donald Trump on trashing the 2nd Amendment. But you can't find even one democrat officeholder who thinks so. And from this, you conclude it's the democrats who want to take out the 2nd Amendment?

    I don't think you've given this enough thought.

    What the president expressed there, infringes the right.
    Of course. Did you really think that a person who would trash the Bill of Rights would somehow exempt the 2nd Amendment? Seriously?
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  9. #21
    TOL Legend The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,053
    Thanks
    181
    Thanked 2,887 Times in 1,924 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    372012
    Rusha writes:
    Lie ... IF he hated it, it wouldn't be happening. Intentionally inflicting harm on children due to hatred of their parents is NOT prolife or pro-child.
    Glorydaz writes:
    Lie....it's the Democrates who keep these long standing problems from being solved.
    It's not a longstanding policy. It was implemented by Trump's AG, Sessions. It could end tomorrow if Trump so ordered. He's merely lying about who did it. That's not at issue.

    U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Thursday cited the Bible to defend the Trump administration’s policy of separating children from their parents caught illegally crossing the border.
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/se...der-2018-06-14

    Did you really believe Trump when he said that the democrats did this?
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Rusha (June 16th, 2018)

  11. #22
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    12,840
    Thanks
    7,396
    Thanked 9,003 Times in 4,985 Posts

    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147731
    Session's own church rebukes him:

    Faith leaders’ statement on family separation

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Council of Bishops of The United Methodist Church is joining other faith organizations in a statement urging the U.S. government to stop its policy of separating immigrant families.

    Below is the full statement signed by dozens of faith organizations. Bishop Kenneth H. Carter, president of the Council of Bishops, signed on behalf of the Council.
    So keep your candles burning

    a.k.a. starchild, starburst, stardust, sweetpea, and dumber than dirt.

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to annabenedetti For Your Post:

    Arthur Brain (June 16th, 2018),Foxfire (June 16th, 2018),Rusha (June 16th, 2018)

  13. #23
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    20,720
    Thanks
    2,031
    Thanked 5,752 Times in 4,206 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147729
    If you don't want your children taken away from you, don't involve them in an illegal activity.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    fool (June 16th, 2018),lifeisgood (June 21st, 2018)

  15. #24
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    20,720
    Thanks
    2,031
    Thanked 5,752 Times in 4,206 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147729


    The Truth about Separating Kids



    The latest furor over Trump immigration policy involves the separation of children from parents at the border.
    As usual, the outrage obscures more than it illuminates, so itís worth walking through whatís happening here.
    For the longest time, illegal immigration was driven by single males from Mexico. Over the last decade, the flow has shifted to women, children, and family units from Central America. This poses challenges we havenít confronted before and has made what once were relatively minor wrinkles in the law loom very large.


    The Trump administration isnít changing the rules that pertain to separating an adult from the child. Those remain the same. Separation happens only if officials find that the adult is falsely claiming to be the childís parent, or is a threat to the child, or is put into criminal proceedings.

    Itís the last that is operative here. The past practice had been to give a free pass to an adult who is part of a family unit. The new Trump policy is to prosecute all adults. The idea is to send a signal that we are serious about our laws and to create a deterrent against re-entry. (Illegal entry is a misdemeanor, illegal re-entry a felony.)


    When a migrant is prosecuted for illegal entry, he or she is taken into custody by the U.S. Marshals. In no circumstance anywhere in the U.S. do the marshals care for the children of people they take into custody. The child is taken into the custody of HHS, who cares for them at temporary shelters.

    The criminal proceedings are exceptionally short, assuming there is no aggravating factor such as a prior illegal entity or another crime. The migrants generally plead guilty, and they are then sentenced to time served, typically all in the same day, although practices vary along the border. After this, they are returned to the custody of ICE.

    If the adult then wants to go home, in keeping with the expedited order of removal that is issued as a matter of course, itís relatively simple. The adult should be reunited quickly with his or her child, and the family returned home as a unit. In this scenario, thereís only a very brief separation.


    Where it becomes much more of an issue is if the adult files an asylum claim. In that scenario, the adults are almost certainly going to be detained longer than the government is allowed to hold their children.


    Thatís because of something called the Flores Consent Decree from 1997. It says that unaccompanied children can be held only 20 days. A ruling by the Ninth Circuit extended this 20-day limit to children who come as part of family units. So even if we want to hold a family unit together, we are forbidden from doing so.

    The clock ticking on the time the government can hold a child will almost always run out before an asylum claim is settled. The migrant is allowed ten days to seek an attorney, and there may be continuances or other complications.

    This creates the choice of either releasing the adults and children together into the country pending the ajudication of the asylum claim, or holding the adults and releasing the children. If the adult is held, HHS places the child with a responsible party in the U.S., ideally a relative (migrants are likely to have family and friends here).

    Even if Flores didnít exist, the government would be very constrained in how many family units it can accommodate. ICE has only about 3,000 family spaces in shelters. It is also limited in its overall space at the border, which is overwhelmed by the ongoing influx. This means that ó whatever the Trump administration would prefer to do ó many adults are still swiftly released.


    Why try to hold adults at all? First of all, if an asylum-seeker is detained, it means that the claim goes through the process much more quickly, a couple of months or less rather than years. Second, if an adult is released while the claim is pending, the chances of ever finding that person again once he or she is in the country are dicey, to say the least. It is tantamount to allowing the migrant to live here, no matter what the merits of the case.

    A few points about all this:

    1) Family units can go home quickly. The option that both honors our laws and keeps family units together is a swift return home after prosecution. But immigrant advocates hate it because they want the migrants to stay in the United States. How you view this question will depend a lot on how you view the motivation of the migrants (and how seriously you take our laws and our border).

    2) Thereís a better way to claim asylum. Every indication is that the migrant flow to the United States is discretionary. It nearly dried up at the beginning of the Trump administration when migrants believed that they had no chance of getting into the United States. Now, it is going in earnest again because the message got out that, despite the rhetoric, the policy at the border hasnít changed. This strongly suggests that the flow overwhelmingly consists of economic migrants who would prefer to live in the United States, rather than victims of persecution in their home country who have no option but to get out.


    Children should not be making this journey that is fraught with peril. But there is now a premium on bringing children because of how we have handled these cases.


    Even if a migrant does have a credible fear of persecution, there is a legitimate way to pursue that claim, and it does not involve entering the United States illegally. First, such people should make their asylum claim in the first country where they feel safe, i.e., Mexico or some other country they are traversing to get here. Second, if for some reason they are threatened everywhere but the United States, they should show up at a port of entry and make their claim there rather than crossing the border illegally.

    3) There is a significant moral cost to not enforcing the border. There is obviously a moral cost to separating a parent from a child and almost everyone would prefer not to do it. But, under current policy and with the current resources, the only practical alternative is letting family units who show up at the border live in the country for the duration. Not only does this make a mockery of our laws, it creates an incentive for people to keep bringing children with them.
    Needless to say, children should not be making this journey that is fraught with peril. But there is now a premium on bringing children because of how we have handled these cases. They are considered chits.

    In April, the New York Times reported:
    Some migrants have admitted they brought their children not only to remove them from danger in such places as Central America and Africa, but because they believed it would cause the authorities to release them from custody sooner.
    Others have admitted to posing falsely with children who are not their own, and Border Patrol officials say that such instances of fraud are increasing.
    According to azcentral.com, it is ďcommon to have parents entrust their children to a smuggler as a favor or for profit.Ē


    If someone is determined to come here illegally, the decent and safest thing would be to leave the child at home with a relative and send money back home. Because we favor family units over single adults, we are creating an incentive to do the opposite and use children to cut deals with smugglers.


    4) Congress can fix this. Congress can change the rules so the Flores consent decree will no longer apply, and it can appropriate more money for family shelters at the border. This is an obvious thing to do that would eliminate the tension between enforcing our laws and keeping family units together. The Trump administration is throwing as many resources as it can at the border to expedite the process, and it desperately wants the Flores consent decree reversed. Despite some mixed messages, if the administration had its druthers, family units would be kept together and their cases settled quickly.

    The missing piece here is Congress, but little outrage will be directed at it, and probably nothing will be done. And so our perverse system will remain in place and the crisis at the border will rumble on.



    https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/...ids-at-border/

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    fool (June 16th, 2018)

  17. #25
    TOL Legend The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,053
    Thanks
    181
    Thanked 2,887 Times in 1,924 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    372012
    None of this changes the fact that Trump lied when he blamed the removal of children from their parents on the democrats. In fact, it was implemented by his administraton.

    He lied when he said he wanted to end it, too. He can do that at any time, since it's his policy.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Rusha (June 16th, 2018)

  19. #26
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    7,277
    Thanks
    412
    Thanked 822 Times in 713 Posts

    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    None of this changes the fact that Trump lied when he blamed the removal of children from their parents on the democrats. In fact, it was implemented by his administraton.

    He lied when he said he wanted to end it, too. He can do that at any time, since it's his policy.
    Good taste your own medicine.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  20. #27
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    20,720
    Thanks
    2,031
    Thanked 5,752 Times in 4,206 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147729
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    None of this changes the fact that Trump lied when he blamed the removal of children from their parents on the democrats. In fact, it was implemented by his administraton.

    He lied when he said he wanted to end it, too. He can do that at any time, since it's his policy.
    as you learned, that's just not so:

    That’s because of something called the Flores Consent Decree from 1997. It says that unaccompanied children can be held only 20 days. A ruling by the Ninth Circuit extended this 20-day limit to children who come as part of family units. So even if we want to hold a family unit together, we are forbidden from doing so.


  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    fool (June 16th, 2018),lifeisgood (June 21st, 2018)

  22. #28
    TOL Legend The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,053
    Thanks
    181
    Thanked 2,887 Times in 1,924 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    372012
    As noted earlier, Trump agrees that his new policy is horrible, and he says he'll rescind it, if Congress gives him his wall.

    Otherwise, he says, he'll continue abusing children to get at their parents. Even FOX News finds it despicable:

    Trump suggests separation of families at border is a negotiating tool
    President Donald Trump suggested Saturday that he is using his administration’s separation of families at the US border as a negotiating tool to get Democrats to cave on his immigration demands, which include funding for a border wall, curbing legal immigration into the US, and tightening the rules for border enforcement.

    http://fox40.com/2018/06/16/trump-su...otiating-tool/


    Which is not surprising. During a fight over his father's will, Trump withdrew medical care for the severely-ill child of a relative, as a negotiating tool. It's the kind of person he is.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to The Barbarian For Your Post:

    Rusha (June 17th, 2018)

  24. #29
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    20,720
    Thanks
    2,031
    Thanked 5,752 Times in 4,206 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147729
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    ...Trump withdrew medical care for the severely-ill child of a relative...
    in my experience, medical care is provided by medical professionals

    is trump a medical professional?

  25. #30
    TOL Legend The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,053
    Thanks
    181
    Thanked 2,887 Times in 1,924 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    372012
    Donald Trump cut off medical funds to nephew's sick baby because he was 'angry' over family feud
    After this came to light, Freddy's children sued, claiming Donald Trump (their uncle) and his siblings had wielded "undue influence" over Fred Sr, who suffered from dementia in the last years of his life.

    It is alleged that a week later Donald retaliated by withdrawing the funds that were meant to pay for the healthcare of his nephew's ill child.

    Explaining this decision, Donald told the paper: "I was angry because they sued,"

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6795131.html

    He was angry at the parents, so he tried to hurt their baby. It's not the first time for him, you see.
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us