Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Supreme Court: The Wall Can Go Foward...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Plus, it's kinda hard to walk to Canada from South or Central America to come in from the North.
    I figured they'd just swim around the US.
    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

    My Personal Blog

    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

    Quill Sword

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      We agree then. I don't want to see anyone mistreated either. So you should support Trump's plan to allow them to apply from their home country and not have to suffer a 3000 mile trip to be held in cages. right?
      I wonder how it became completely impossible to imagine a situation in which they were not held in cages and in which innocent children were not separated from their parents.

      Starlight said it very clearly:

      My concern is solely about how people are treated during the immigration / asylum-seeking process. Even if the government ends up rejecting their claim and deporting them, what matters is that they were treated well and humanely.

      That means a couple of key things:
      1. It means not stealing their children off them and then kicking them out of the country without their children so they never see their children again.
      2. It means not locking up 50 of them together in a tiny cage with no water except the toilet and no showers and no sanitary products or soap and insufficient temperature control and medical care.
      The fact that currently this appears to happen with no necessity and with no jusitification is not a justification of a wall that would prevent people from experiencing the evil that somehow some people find it decent to expose them to currently.
      "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
        I figured they'd just swim around the US.
        Laughing. Yeah, cause the Rio Grande is such a deep and raging river!

        rio grande.jpeg
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
          NZ's pop density: 18 ppl/km
          Source

          US pop density: 36 ppl/km
          Source
          Not necessarily particularly relevant. New Zealand has a pretty large percentage of uninhabitable mountainous regions, e.g:


          Uninhabitable areas unsurprisingly have a very low population density. Most cities here are coastal because that's where the inhabitable land is. The US is lucky enough with its terrain that most of the land area in the 48 contiguous states is inhabitable.

          But NZ can only spare room for an extra 1000 per year
          Refugees are only a very small percentage of total immigration. Our total immigration is among the highest per capita in the western world, double the US's. The refugee quota is an arbitrary figure reflecting what resources the government is currently choosing to spend on providing facilities and programs to integrate refugees into the community. The key, of course, is to treat people well during that process, and that is what the international community is currently calling the US out for.

          The Refugee Resettlement Center in NZ offers its spare capacity to the public as a hostel, has 4.5 stars on google reviews, and looks like this...



          Whereas the US facilities look like this...



          and this...



          And also in the US they steal the children of asylum seekers and don't return them.

          Can you understand the difference?

          on a Population Density basis - which is the superior measure
          No, it isn't. Firstly, total land area isn't the same as habitable land area. Secondly, a country's capacity to allocate workers and resources to manage and assist refugees settling is proportional to its current population not its empty land. Thirdly, pretty much everyone in this discussion, and certainly myself, think that a country can reasonable decide how many refugees to accept and how many to reject, so the issue under discussion isn't the total number of refugees accepted, it's how the people are treated during the process.

          In the US currently, about a third of asylum seekers are eventually legally admitted to the country (with courts approving their status as a legal resident) while about 2/3rds are rejected and deported. I don't have an issue with that one way or the other. If those are the approximate numbers the US wants to accept, that's fine. What I have an issue with is how those people are treated in the meantime. Even if you are so hard hearted that you care nothing for those who are eventually deported, you've got to realize almost a third of these people will eventually become legal US residents and even citizens... are you seriously okay with having US citizens detained in the conditions depicted above for years?
          "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
          "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
          "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            Laughing. Yeah, cause the Rio Grande is such a deep and raging river!

            [ATTACH=CONFIG]38700[/ATTACH]
            Hey, you don't turn your back on that river! We were camping along the Rio Grande for an SCA event - along with a LOT of other folks. The nice knights found a lovely spot, set up nicely and went to bash out each other's brains. When they came back, it was under water! Which was even funnier listening to them trying to find their camp - and then their gear - in the dark!
            "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

            "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

            My Personal Blog

            My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

            Quill Sword

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              So you should support Trump's plan to allow them to apply from their home country and not have to suffer a 3000 mile trip to be held in cages. right?
              I've got ZERO issue with offering easier methods for applying for asylum, that bit sounds great. But I'm not fine with forcing them to apply from their home country. With a lot of these asylum seekers the conditions in their home country were so terrible they were forced to flee for their lives.

              As I understand it, the point of Trump's plan to effectively to break the international asylum treaties that say that if a desperate person turns up at your border you've got to offer assistance and have a legal process to judge the validity of their asylum claim. Secondarily, it seems like Trump would like to move the current refugee concentration camps to Guatemala in order to reduce the legal rights of the occupants and oversight of the facilities: Like Gitmo, if it's off US soil, anything goes. I don't see that as being a positive step for the well-being of refugees. As far as I can tell, Trump's suggested policy is not originating out of love or a concern for the well-being of the refugees, it's originating out of a hatred of those people.
              "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
              "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
              "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                Plus, it's kinda hard to walk to Canada from South or Central America to come in from the North. I think Jimmy flunked Canography.
                we could just run the wall up the border of california and washington and then they would have a highway straight to canada!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                  I wonder how it became completely impossible to imagine a situation in which they were not held in cages and in which innocent children were not separated from their parents.

                  Starlight said it very clearly:



                  The fact that currently this appears to happen with no necessity and with no jusitification is not a justification of a wall that would prevent people from experiencing the evil that somehow some people find it decent to expose them to currently.
                  easy, if there is a wall then they can't get in and be arrested and put in cages. They can still apply for asylum at a US embassy in their home country and then wait for the results of their application.
                  The Dept of Justice says that out of 100 people applying for asylum only about 12 actually qualify. The rest just wasted their time and have to travel all the way back home. if they don't have to travel so much, they can save the money they are using to pay the coyotes and just wait for the answer at home.

                  so a wall along with the new rules stops the overcrowding in at the detention centers and the problem of bad conditions. We just can't handle the number of people coming in at one time like what happens right now.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Yeah, cause the Rio Grande is such a deep and raging river!
                    The recently circulating picture of the drowned father and child suggests it can be.

                    Much of that border area is flood zones, which incidentally, is a core problem with a 'wall' or any substantial barrier because the water has to be able to travel across the border en masse in the case of floods.
                    "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                    "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                    "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                      I've got ZERO issue with offering easier methods for applying for asylum, that bit sounds great. But I'm not fine with forcing them to apply from their home country. With a lot of these asylum seekers the conditions in their home country were so terrible they were forced to flee for their lives.

                      As I understand it, the point of Trump's plan to effectively to break the international asylum treaties that say that if a desperate person turns up at your border you've got to offer assistance and have a legal process to judge the validity of their asylum claim. Secondarily, it seems like Trump would like to move the current refugee concentration camps to Guatemala in order to reduce the legal rights of the occupants and oversight of the facilities: Like Gitmo, if it's off US soil, anything goes. I don't see that as being a positive step for the well-being of refugees. As far as I can tell, Trump's suggested policy is not originating out of love or a concern for the well-being of the refugees, it's originating out of a hatred of those people.
                      the conditions in the USA are a direct result of too many immigrants flooding the border. We have to stem the flow.

                      the new rules say that someone can't go through a third country to apply for asylum in the USA without being turned down for asylum in that third country first. So they can either apply in their home country, or go to a neighboring country and apply for asylum, but they can't just trot through Mexico to the USA. Mexico offered them asylum and they ignored it to come to the USA. That is no longer someone desperate to flee a dangerous situation. No longer a "refugee"

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        the conditions in the USA are a direct result of too many immigrants flooding the border. We have to stem the flow.
                        You don't have to, it's not like the US literally can't cope with the numbers. But if you choose to accept less total immigrants, that is fine, I think it's totally within a country's right to choose how many are accepted.

                        the new rules say that someone can't go through a third country to apply for asylum in the USA without being turned down for asylum in that third country first.
                        A core problem I see with that is that as I understand it there are multiple countries in South America currently where violence is extreme, and a lot of the drug cartels operate cross-border. What is a person supposed to do if its not merely their own country but those around them that are violent, and if those who are targeting them operate in all the countries they're 'allowed' to seek asylum in?

                        I don't have a problem in theory with the idea of trying to distinguish true asylum seekers from people who have simply decided they want to live in the US by looking at what other countries they crossed through and could have stopped in. But surely that is already something the immigration courts consider when judging whether a given asylum claim is valid? If not, it should be.

                        But the general idea of working with central american countries to try and create a more organized process in the region about asylum and reduce the number of asylum seekers turning up on the US's doorstep is just common sense. Unfortunately Trump will presumably bungle it like he has everything else in his life and presidency.

                        Mexico offered them asylum and they ignored it to come to the USA.
                        Who is the 'them' here? Mexico does not generically offer unlimited amounts of asylum to every single refugee that crosses it. Maybe you're confusing a specific group and specific offer with standard practice?
                        "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                        "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                        "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                          I only addressed those with a legitimate claim to asylum - and as I stated, most are NOT in immediate danger of life or limb. Your assertion that they cannot apply in their own countries when that is the case, is moronic. Your assertion that they are better off fleeing for the border rather than seeking immediate protection in an embassy or consulate is also moronic. There will undoubtedly be a tiny number who are close enough that safely crossing the border is the better option than safely reaching the embassy - but that does not make the case that all asylum seekers must first flee the country - which is YOUR moronic argument.
                          Getting a bit emotional there - look at all that bold. Keep it rational now. An entitled woman that lives in one of the richest country in the world - first world splaining it like the world's refugees like life is a Disney film.

                          For the example I gave, your position is laughable. I suspect that in most instances, it is laughable, given the definition of 'flee' and 'well-founded fear' in that of asylee and refugee. So by defintion, you are wrong. But hey, let's consider an example - you really think the Rohingya should of just stuck around, waited it out? Or people under threat of persecution should just wait and see what happens to them? Your reaching an embassy story, again, bonkers. What are they going to do there, just chill in the lobby for the next year while their application is held up by an administration of dubious intent? Pull the other one it has got bells on.

                          Asylum seekers, that are being persecuted for and that meet the necessary and sufficient conditions, need to have the possibility of exit to a safe third country where they can apply for asylum. You don't like that. Because they are coming to the US and taking all of your cake?

                          While you continue to kick down to the poor and downtrodden - you're being robbed blind by the rich. But hey, who cares, right?
                          Last edited by Zara; 07-29-2019, 05:29 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Zara View Post
                            Getting a bit emotional there - look at all that bold. Keep it rational now. An entitled woman that lives in one of the richest country in the world - first world splaining it like the world's refugees like life is a Disney film.

                            ...
                            Yeah, no - the bold is because you can't read the whole thing. And once again, you fail to address what I actually said - big shock, I know.
                            "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                            "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                            My Personal Blog

                            My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                            Quill Sword

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                              Oh, nice. Hi Zara, I was already liking your posts, but nice to see another fellow Kiwi.
                              "I just happened to notice this post...."
                              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                              sigpic
                              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                                a few migrants crossing the border
                                "a few"

                                So very very false, how you can say that with straight face demi cannot understand.
                                Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                162 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                379 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X