It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Christian Leaders To Jeff Sessions: The Bible Does Not Justify Separating Families

page: 10
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck




how is opposing a law the same as violating it?


I never said it was. When did I say it was? I can't clarify what I never said, but that you imagine that I stand for.


edit on 16-6-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell
People one day will look back and wonder(like Germans looked back in horror wondering how they could have ever supported Hitler) how they could have ever supported Trump.

The problem is with Hitler people didn’t have a choice mostly


This is semi-off topic, but reminded me of something.

I lived in Germany some 25 years ago, above a high class restaurant an hour outside of Frankfurt; the kind of place one made reservations six months to a year in advance and the Cardinal of Frankfurt had his own seat in the back.

Anyways, the plot of land was leased from an old, old German, who used to be a Hitler Junge. The parking lot had a tree that was right smack in the middle of it, so it made it really hard to maneuver the limos and other oversized vehicles that would frequent. And any time the tree was brought up in the past, I came to find out, it brought down the wrath of Gods on anyone that dared ask.

You see, as a Hitler Youth, they all planted a tree for the fuhrer when they were young -- and some 40 years later that German still did not want that tree touched, he was every bit as proud of it as he was when he planted it.

People don't change that much, they just learn how to be quiet when they can't be themselves.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: TheRedneck




how is opposing a law the same as violating it?


I never said it was. When did I say it was? I can't clarify what I never said, but that you imagine that I stand for.



Jesus. 10 pages.

I'll say it one more time, so LOOK AT ME when I'm talking to you!.

If you don't want to get locked up, don't commit a crime. The fact that criminals are locked up, and separated from their children, is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT!

The fact that they are separated from their children is INCIDENTAL.

Jeff Sessions didn't make these people stupid, M'Kay? But just keep throwing around the complete lack of personal responsibility till it sticks to anyone other that the person who is ACTUALLY responsible.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 02:48 PM
link   
President Trump is not separating these families. These families know the risk when they illegally cross into the us and are caught. What they are hoping for is amnesty and use the children as 'anchor babies'. Mexicans for years would take pregnant women to the Port of Entry bridges, wait till the water broke and then step across 'the line'. They then received a free ride to the hospital, free medical care and a baby that is a US Citizen and cannot be deported.

This is what is happening. These are not poor people looking for a new life. These are schemers looking for freebies...



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell

People one day will look back and wonder(like Germans looked back in horror wondering how they could have ever supported Hitler) how they could have ever supported Trump.

The problem is with Hitler people didn’t have a choice mostly



That's a complete and utter cop-out Will. It's also complete and utter bullsnip.

Human beings always, always, ALWAYS HAVE A CHOICE.
It may not be a good choice, or a safe choice, or an attractive choice, but we ALWAYS have a choice.

Maybe that choice means you never see your kids again, but you ALWAYS have a choice.

Sometimes that choice can kill you, and sometimes that choice can even kill others, but you ALWAYS have a choice.

Any sentient, self-aware being capable of reason ALWAYS has a choice.

That's kinda the point!



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp


What you just said has nothing to do with the conversation you just inserted yourself into.



If you don't want to get locked up, don't commit a crime.


10 pages! How obtuse can you get?

No, I won't look at you!


You, SIT DOWN! BE HUMBLE!


edit on 16-6-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: Willtell

People one day will look back and wonder(like Germans looked back in horror wondering how they could have ever supported Hitler) how they could have ever supported Trump.

The problem is with Hitler people didn’t have a choice mostly



That's a complete and utter cop-out Will. It's also complete and utter bullsnip.

Human beings always, always, ALWAYS HAVE A CHOICE.
It may not be a good choice, or a safe choice, or an attractive choice, but we ALWAYS have a choice.

Maybe that choice means you never see your kids again, but you ALWAYS have a choice.

Sometimes that choice can kill you, and sometimes that choice can even kill others, but you ALWAYS have a choice.

Any sentient, self-aware being capable of reason ALWAYS has a choice.

That's kinda the point!


You make a good point, and I have no great disagreement with you, just a minor one.

The people at the time of Hitler would have been killed if they went against him like we speak against Trump.

This should remind us that we have much to be grateful and thankful for, even with all of America's flaws, it does allow us the right to express our opinions freely.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:04 PM
link   
I wonder what Pence thinks of this.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: daveinats
President Trump is not separating these families. These families know the risk when they illegally cross into the us and are caught. What they are hoping for is amnesty and use the children as 'anchor babies'. Mexicans for years would take pregnant women to the Port of Entry bridges, wait till the water broke and then step across 'the line'. They then received a free ride to the hospital, free medical care and a baby that is a US Citizen and cannot be deported.

This is what is happening. These are not poor people looking for a new life. These are schemers looking for freebies...



I don’t understand a law ( same in Canada ) where just because a baby is born there , it automatically grants citizenship to that child. Babies belong to parents and should be given citizenship to either or both parent’s home countries.

Maybe that will change someday, closing a loophole that many have used to their advantage.. not just mexicans, and not just in the US .



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


The OP noted that Christian leaders had responded to AG Sessions ... the rest is your interpretation.

And I will admit that part of that interpretation (all readings are interpretations to some degree) is based on the OP being well known as antagonistic to Christian attitudes. Part of bring human, I suppose...


I agree that the Separation of Powers is not fluff.


The President cannot make law, given.


DACA was institued by Obama EO, not Congressional legislation.


I"m not sure how your assertion that Trump is at heart trying to help the Dreamers is valid.

My assertion is actually based upon the above quotes from you. Please consider:

If, as we both state, the President cannot make law, then the DACA EO is unconstitutional. It implements a legal remedy to a law which did not exist before DACA. To use an example, it is no less than a police chief deciding that even though burglary is illegal, people with the last name "Jones" can apply to not be prosecuted for burglary. Yes, that is a silly example, but legally all the applicable conditions are there: the action is illegal per legislative action; the chief executive officer has made a policy concerning the law; that policy negates the law over a condition not legally recognized as a remedy.

If the DACA EO is unconstitutional, it could only remain in effect until such time as it was either injoined by a Federal court or struck down by the Supreme Court. At the time Trump made his original DACA decision, a lawsuit attempting to invalidate it was well on its way to the Supreme Court. That lawsuit, if upheld, would have invalidated the EO and ended the DACA program, quite possibly overnight.

By ending the DACA order, Trump effectively dismissed the lawsuit... why sue over something that no longer exists, or at least over something that will likely not exist by the time the lawsuit comes to fruition? In the same breath, Trump extended DACA for 6 months "to give Congress time to act." All Congress must do to solve DACA is codify it, and I along with many 'conservatives' I know, am firmly behind such legislation as long as felons are not included and steps are taken to help alleviate the necessity of the new law in the future.

Part of those steps is a wall. Despite all other arguments, I don't see how anyone can reasonably argue that a wall designed to be difficult to scale will not make it harder to walk across the border. That's kinda what walls do. I have walls around my house, and they are quite effective at not letting animals walks into my house on a whim.

The President has many duties: he is Commander in Chief of the military; he is the ultimate authority when it comes to executive agencies (including the Border Patrol and ICE); he acts as a check and balance on the two other branches of government; he handles foreign interactions; he is the public face of the USA. As the ultimate authority over executive agencies, he is duty-bound to enforce the laws... he might get away, admittedly, with de-proritizing certain legalities, but he cannot simply ignore his obligation when the laws and violations are clear.

it is hard to imagine a situation where the laws and violations are more clear than a Supreme Court decision striking down DACA. Trump's hands would be tied. He would be duty bound to round up and deport all DACA participants, especially since he already, thanks to the DACA EO, has their locations and names.

Trump could have just shut off DACA without giving a temporary extension. He could have taken the records collected under DACA and just started deporting. He didn't. He trusted Congress (OK, that was a bone-head move there) to fix the issue they were so upset about. Congress didn't. Now we have the possibility of the immediate deportation still happening, not because of Trump, but because of Congress.

(I could not care less what the NYT thinks... I can watch events without the need to be told what to think of them, thank you.)

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: MteWamp


What you just said has nothing to do with the conversation you just inserted yourself into.



If you don't want to get locked up, don't commit a crime.


10 pages! How obtuse can you get?

No, I won't look at you!


You, SIT DOWN! BE HUMBLE!



I was referring to a very similar discussion from yesterday that covered most of these points.

And, as much as I hate to say it, you DID look, so umm, that's kinda moot.

Also, I am sitting. But this, like you said, is off topic, so I'll move on.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


DACA is policy, not law. Trump didn't have to do anything with DACA. Trump chose to "kill DACA" for political leverage for immigration and wall demands. DACA was not a problem until Trump made it one.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp




And, as much as I hate to say it, you DID look, so umm, that's kinda moot.


I never made eye contact though!




Also, I am sitting.


Alright then! My job is done!



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:26 PM
link   
There's like 80% rate of being raped for women and children illegally crossing the border, iirc. Not to mention risking deaths, kidnappings by smugglers, etc.

If a man or woman rapes their children, they deserve to have their children taken away. If they have someone else rape their children, it is no different they should be taken away.
edit on 16-6-2018 by Xenogears because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha


I never said it was. When did I say it was? I can't clarify what I never said, but that you imagine that I stand for.

*sigh*

Beside your next post, just under your name/profile pic, there is an icon that looks like a little person (loosely IMO). When you click it, you will get a menu, and one of the options is "posts in thread." Click that and you will get to re-read every single post you made in this thread. Maybe you can figure it out from there.

I'm sorry; this has become a new and irritating tactic - people making a statement and then claiming they never made it. Most folks won't go to the trouble of looking, which is why I normally quote part of the post I am replying to. I am not going to drag this silliness out by repeating every word you said. I have been trying to work out some potential bugs in an Arduino application while I discuss things here, and this is becoming intrusive on my time already.

If you are serious, you can look and try to see where the miscommunication occurred and even possibly try to correct it. If you are not, you can continue to complain willy-nilly. Whatever you choose is fine by me.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

www.usnews.com...

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


I'm not to go looking through my post history to try and find the comment that you misinterpreted. If I have contradicted myself, show it. But, what you've shown so far is not contradiction, it's you assuming my stance and putting words in my mouth and ideas in my mind that were never there.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: MteWamp

originally posted by: Willtell

People one day will look back and wonder(like Germans looked back in horror wondering how they could have ever supported Hitler) how they could have ever supported Trump.

The problem is with Hitler people didn’t have a choice mostly



That's a complete and utter cop-out Will. It's also complete and utter bullsnip.

Human beings always, always, ALWAYS HAVE A CHOICE.
It may not be a good choice, or a safe choice, or an attractive choice, but we ALWAYS have a choice.

Maybe that choice means you never see your kids again, but you ALWAYS have a choice.

Sometimes that choice can kill you, and sometimes that choice can even kill others, but you ALWAYS have a choice.

Any sentient, self-aware being capable of reason ALWAYS has a choice.

That's kinda the point!


You make a good point, and I have no great disagreement with you, just a minor one.

The people at the time of Hitler would have been killed if they went against him like we speak against Trump.

This should remind us that we have much to be grateful and thankful for, even with all of America's flaws, it does allow us the right to express our opinions freely.



That's completely accurate, and a great point. And it is great to live in a place where you can have and express most any opinion freely.

It was VERY dangerous to speak out against most any of the leadership of the Nazi party. But there were also a brave few, mostly military, who actually understood the insanity, and opposed it, or at least attempted to oppose it.

They almost succeeded. Several times. They made a choice and failed, and they died for it.

Also, I meant to tell you, I'm old, or almost old, and can come across harsh sometimes, but there's ALWAYS respect, and it's never, never, ever personal. I don't want to go farther off topic so I'll stop, but I felt the need to say that.

You have a great weekend, my friend.



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

OK, your choice. But my assertions stand. I know what you said, as well as anyone else who cares to look.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 16 2018 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


So? Trump's ending DACA wasn't forced upon him. It was a calculated decision that allowed him to use DACA recipients as hostages in exchange for his anti-immigration agenda and funding for his wall. Notice that Trump's administration is doing nothing to defend DACA in Texas courts right now. Sessions has decided NOT to defend DACA this round.

At any moment Trump could pardon (amnesty) DACA recipients and allow them paths to green cards and citizenship. But that won't give him the leverage he so desperately needs to implement his anti-immigration agenda by holding DACA recipients hostage.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join