Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
grimreefer

Sanders Shuts Down Acosta:

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

stick

Yeah government officials saying the bible gives them the right to do whatever the hell they want is pretty scary. This separation of children from their families is evil, and using the bible to try and justify it is sick.

 

Nice twist, but that's not what was said.

 

If they don't want their families split up, maybe they should just stay in their home country and avoid that possibility, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

Do you agree that rules are to be followed and laws should be enforced, regardless if the Bible states that or not?

 

 

I think we ought to leave the bible out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
grimreefer

I think we ought to leave the bible out of it.

In fairness, Sessions was responding to some Catholic bishop group that was inserting themselves into the politics of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coach

In fairness, Sessions was responding to some Catholic bishop group that was inserting themselves into the politics of it.

 

 

Many Catholic clerics have been butting in for decades. It doesn't make them smart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

persona non grata

 

Ah, thanks.

 

B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown

Were these unaccompanied minors or children who arrived with their parents and then were taken away?

 

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

Nice twist, but that's not what was said.

 

If they don't want their families split up, maybe they should just stay in their home country and avoid that possibility, no?

The administration should have some balls just say so instead of quoting bible verses or whining that “it’s the Democrats fault!”, because they’re taking a little heat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython

The administration should have some balls just say so instead of quoting bible verses or whining that “it’s the Democrats fault!”, because they’re taking a little heat.

 

It has already been pointed out that it was a (pro-illegal) Catholic bishop group that started interjecting the Bible into it, and any administration comments about the Bible were responses thereto. And since the policy being followed IS a Democrat policy, and the Democrats have repeatedly refused to cooperate in fixing that policy, it's perfectly fair and honest and reasonable to point out that any problems created by that policy are the Democrats' fault.

 

I realize it's invariably your position that Trump & his administration are "the bad guys", LOL, but you're only destroying your own credibility with such an attitude.

 

B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joe the Pagan

We all know Democrats would never do anything like that

 

copy-of-0824-gonzalez-jpg.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

It has already been pointed out that it was a (pro-illegal) Catholic bishop group that started interjecting the Bible into it, and any administration comments about the Bible were responses thereto. And since the policy being followed IS a Democrat policy, and the Democrats have repeatedly refused to cooperate in fixing that policy, it's perfectly fair and honest and reasonable to point out that any problems created by that policy are the Democrats' fault.

 

I realize it's invariably your position that Trump & his administration are "the bad guys", LOL, but you're only destroying your own credibility with such an attitude.

 

B)

 

And Sessions responded with bible quotes.

 

It this administration policy to prosecute and imprison everyone, even families coming over the border. Yes, both parties and past presidents have failed miserably in securing the border, I don’t dispute this but which party has been in charge for at least a year and half? Where is their fix for this problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

We all know Democrats would never do anything like that

 

copy-of-0824-gonzalez-jpg.jpg

That kid was reunited with his father, where he belonged. It was conservatives that felt it was the American right and duty to keep a child from his own natural parent, based on ideology.

 

Most of our population recognized this crap for what it was and Clinton did not suffer any widespread backlash, because anyone could imagine their own family stuck on foreign soil in some political tug of war.

Edited by Ladybird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
It this administration policy to prosecute and imprison everyone, even families coming over the border.

 

Why is it that liberals always fail to mention the fact that it's about people (and families) ILLEGALLY coming over the border?

 

People who follow our immigration procedures ARE NOT prosecuted and imprisoned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stick

I think we ought to leave the bible out of it.

 

Oh Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stuck, can you freakin read?

 

Here let me dumb it down for you:

 

Do you agree that rules are to be followed and laws should be enforced?

 

Did you notice I left the part off you could have easily ignored? SMFH

Edited by stick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

Oh Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stuck, can you freakin read?

 

Here let me dumb it down for you:

 

Do you agree that rules are to be followed and laws should be enforced?

 

Did you notice I left the part off you could have easily ignored? SMFH

 

I didn't judge the policy one way or the other. Nothing illegal is going on here (provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those legally seeking asylum).

 

I think it was mistake for Sessions to reply that way to the priest (or whovever) and for the administrations' whiny finger pointing. They ought to just say 'this is our policy and that's the way it's going be".

Edited by Ladybird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection
Nothing illegal is going on here (provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those legally seeking asylum).

 

You really need to step away from your MSNBC/NPR/CNN "news" sources. You are being fed propaganda.

 

People legally seeking asylum are not being "prosecuted". If they request asylum at the border they will be detained (not prosecuted) until they complete our procedures for people who don't have a legal right to enter the US. Most people seeking asylum don't qualify. It is mistakenly believed that fleeing violence in their home country qualifies one for asylum. That is not the case. They must prove that they have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion if returned to their country (source). Fear of gang violence doesn't qualify.

 

People who don't want to be detained can apply for refugee status while still outside of the US (source). Coming to the border unprepared is a political stunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

You really need to step away from your MSNBC/NPR/CNN "news" sources. You are being fed propaganda.

 

People legally seeking asylum are not being "prosecuted". If they request asylum at the border they will be detained (not prosecuted) until they complete our procedures for people who don't have a legal right to enter the US. Most people seeking asylum don't qualify. It is mistakenly believed that fleeing violence in their home country qualifies one for asylum. That is not the case. They must prove that they have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion if returned to their country (source). Fear of gang violence doesn't qualify.

 

People who don't want to be detained can apply for refugee status while still outside of the US (source). Coming to the border unprepared is a political stunt.

 

I wrote "provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those seeking asylum.."

 

I don't take any one sources word for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection

I wrote "provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those seeking asylum.."

 

I don't take any one sources word for it.

 

Then don't believe the sources telling you that asylum applicants are being prosecuted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

I didn't judge the policy one way or the other. Nothing illegal is going on here (provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those legally seeking asylum).

NPR tried very hard to entrap an ICE representative into saying something inflammatory about asylum seekers.

 

He stated that all who come through designated ports of entry and claim asylum, will be processed in a fair way. Also, those families aren't split apart.

 

It's those who cross in the freaking desert far away from entry ports, using coyotes and paying them exorbitant fees, if caught, will have problems with their asylum seeking and ability to initially keep children with them.

 

The agent said that when the families are split, there's ALWAYS a plan to unite them when the parents are processed.

 

I'm very much for that course of action. I know you aren't, which to me is the much more harmful attitude than mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Then don't believe the sources telling you that asylum applicants are being prosecuted.

Zing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

Then don't believe the sources telling you that asylum applicants are being prosecuted.

 

pro·vid·ed

/prəˈvīdəd/

 

conjunction

conjunction: provided

on the condition or understanding that.

 

 

I simply stated that providing, these are not legal asylum cases, this is all legal. Why do pretending that I have accused and stated something as fact when I did no such thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection

pro·vid·ed

/prəˈvīdəd/

 

conjunction

conjunction: provided

on the condition or understanding that.

 

 

I simply stated that providing, these are not legal asylum cases, this is all legal. Why do pretending that I have accused and stated something as fact when I did no such thing?

 

I took issue with something you said. Out of the blue, you suggested that people seeking asylum may be at risk of being prosecuted.

 

I didn't judge the policy one way or the other. Nothing illegal is going on here (provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those legally seeking asylum).

 

Why would you even say that when it's not happening? Here's an example of me doing the same thing you did. Maybe it will help you understand.

 

"Your sister should be free to practice her muslim faith (provided she's not beheading infidels in her neighborhood)".

 

Does that seem like a ridiculous or unnecessary statement to you? I'm sure it does. Saying "provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those legally seeking asylum" is equally ridiculous and unnecessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ladybird

I took issue with something you said. Out of the blue, you suggested that people seeking asylum may be at risk of being prosecuted.

 

 

 

Why would you even say that when it's not happening? Here's an example of me doing the same thing you did. Maybe it will help you understand.

 

"Your sister should be free to practice her muslim faith (provided she's not beheading infidels in her neighborhood)".

 

Does that seem like a ridiculous or unnecessary statement to you? I'm sure it does. Saying "provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those legally seeking asylum" is equally ridiculous and unnecessary.

 

 

That's not entirely true.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/deportation-and-due-process/mother-and-child-fled-congo-only-be-cruelly

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/huppke/ct-met-family-separation-aclu-trump-asylum-huppke-20180316-story.html

 

There are immigrant rights folks who are spreading stories and exaggerating some of the circumstances, but stating "provided a particular circumstance doesn't happen" is not unreasonable.

Edited by Ladybird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natural Selection

That's not entirely true.

https://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/deportation-and-due-process/mother-and-child-fled-congo-only-be-cruelly

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/huppke/ct-met-family-separation-aclu-trump-asylum-huppke-20180316-story.html

 

There are immigrant rights folks who are spreading stories and exaggerating some of the circumstances, but stating "provided a particular circumstance doesn't happen" is not unreasonable.

 

Your links don't show anything other than a person being detained while they go through our asylum procedures. She was not "prosecuted". It's been said a thousand times already...people being detained do not get to bring their children with them to the detention facility. That's the policy for American citizens waiting to see a judge and non-citizens shouldn't be treated any differently.

 

Your links were especially annoying because every other sentence was an attempt to elicit feelings of sadness about their situation. It also claimed that nobody knew why they were separated. Total BS. People seeking asylum are told exactly how things work during their credible fear interview. Nice try, but you failed. My original statements still stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

I'll state the obvious then since the leftists need to be explained explicitly what's going on.

 

Why did the leftwing media and leftwing politicians know to jump on this "children are being separated from their parents" theme so quickly and suddenly?

 

BECAUSE THEY WERE DOING IT UNDER OBAMA AND SAW IT BUT DIDN'T REPORT IT!!! And why not? Obviously because 1) it would have made Obama look bad, and 2) they save their own bad deeds to use against the right at an opportune time.

 

It's so obvious. They always do the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stick

I didn't judge the policy one way or the other. Nothing illegal is going on here (provided they are only prosecuting illegal entrants and not those legally seeking asylum).

 

I think it was mistake for Sessions to reply that way to the priest (or whovever) and for the administrations' whiny finger pointing. They ought to just say 'this is our policy and that's the way it's going be".

 

Asylum from what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...