[One Degree]

Quite frankly I find this statement reprehensible, disgusting, and willfully ignorant. You are not an idiot incapable of understanding that taking a child away from their family and housing them away from everyone they have ever known is traumatizing and cruel. That you excuse this, or willfully ignore it, because you like a cruel policy that prevents people who are fleeing oppression and violence and treats them like a murderer says a great deal about your character.

The rest of the drivel that follows this statement is equally the drivel of a man driven by personal fears and selfishness to excuse open cruelty against people who deserve compassion.

These are people seeking a better life, people and children who have been oppressed, brutalized, seen family murdered, and live in poverty we would never know or have to face. And what greets them but people like you who are so overwhelmingly concerned with their own well being and fear that they can't even devise a policy that doesn't rip children from their parents. Literally unnecessary to any border enforcement policy, you could house them with their parents with not only no extra effort, but less.

But no, we must applaud traumatizing children and declare refugees on par with rapists and murders because something something harmony with nature which is an argument so wrong and made in such bad faith that I can barely fathom what happened to you in your life to make you so completely wrapped up in some vague notions rather than the living suffering of other human beings.

Since you are morally superior, are you going to personally agree to take in a family and be responsible for their welfare and civic obedience? We, as a community, take on that responsibility. It is easy to be morally superior when the government is so large it becomes an abstraction. You are willing to do it because you don’t see yourself actually being responsible. It is ‘the government’ that is responsible. Your moral superiority is a meaningless abstraction. I expect it and even believe there is good in it for the young, but your pretense of being morally superior is both disrespectful and humorous to those who have already passed through where you are.

[mikema63]

Since you are morally superior,

I don't believe this, I don't believe I am any more morally correct than anyone else. I was quite serious about the part where I couldn't imagine what made you close your heart so much. That I do not know what it is doesn't make me believe any less that you believe you are correct, or that deep down the compassion and empathy of a human being is inside you. Burried yes, but there under the layers of callouses of whatever made you decide you couldn't be allowed to feel for another person and makes you turn your head and close your eyes rather than allow for the possibility that you might be hurt.

are you going to personally agree to take in a family and be responsible for their welfare and civic obedience?

This is not how immigration works. Regardless I do what I can to do the most good I think I can. I've made a few sacrifices to advocate for the causes I believe in.

We, as a community, take on that responsibility. It is easy to be morally superior when the government is so large it becomes an abstraction.

You should take a turn at working in local politics, it isn't abstract at all. It's actually pretty anticlimactic to watch a handful of people vote on the lives of human beings, and on things that have almost no impact on anyone, and then break for sandwiches.

I work in our communities, talk to the people effected by these things, I see them cry over the loss of loved ones to our state medicare policy, I see the despair in their eyes when they talk about not being able to feed their children when they tell them they are hungry.

It is not abstract at all.

You are willing to do it because you don’t see yourself actually being responsible.

It's quite literally the career I've chosen to be responsible for trying to help these people, and everyone I can.

It is ‘the government’ that is responsible.

It's me, and you, my husband, and my future children. Our friends and neighbors, each and everyone of us. We are responsible for being human beings. For being decent people.

The conversation started with a position you haven't given up. Taking children from their families for no reason. Cruelty for cruelty's sake. That is our responsibility to. It was our responsibility for allowing it as a community to be the policy of our community and country, and it is our responsibility to end it.

Your moral superiority is a meaningless abstraction.

I do not consider myself morally superior. regardless, my empathy is not an abstraction, my desire to not torture children is not an abstraction. These are real things, things that are central to not only my experience of the world but the human experience of it. Nothing is more real.

I expect it and even believe there is good in it for the young, but your pretense of being morally superior is both disrespectful and humorous to those who have already passed through where you are.

I pity anyone who has "passed through" the ability to feel compassion for and want to end the needless tragedy we have allowed to happen to these children. and anyone who can find humor in needless cruelty.

[Suntzu]

These folks have fucked up their country and now they want to come here and fuck up ours. And to boot, they want to keep their fucked up culture and language. And to top that they traveled 2,000 miles across a country that mostly shares their language and religion to come here.

[mikema63]

"fuck those guys" the wise man said "it's their own individual fault for being threatened with violence and fleeing to a safe country where their children would have a future!"

[Suntzu]

"fuck those guys" the wise man said "it's their own individual fault for being threatened with violence and fleeing to a safe country where their children would have a future!"

Why didn't they flee to Mexico? Or Colombia?

[mikema63]

Your nothing but a bad faith troll. At least one degree is a sincere person. You are just a bullshit artist who likes to be edgy for fun.

[Suntzu]

Your nothing but a bad faith troll. At least one degree is a sincere person. You are just a bullshit artist who likes to be edgy for fun.

Question too tough for you?

[AFAIK]

@mikema, What's wrong with Mexico? Why can't migrants stop at the first safe country they reach?

I had a similar debate with a Greenpeace spokesperson on Facebook about it assisting people traffickers transporting boats to Europe. The spokesman dodged my question and gave me the impression that Greenpeace is made up of white supremacists who think Europe is so awesome, and Turkey so terrible, that migrants should risk drowning in the Mediterranean rather than settle for second best.

[Heisenberg]

@mikema63
For starters, I am not "celebrating" anything. I made the simple point that immigration laws exist for a reason, and that this recent trend of demanding they be ignored because of "the children!" is a cynical ploy. If the presence of a child was all that was required to guarantee a successful asylum application, there would be obvious unintended consequences. Human traffickers aren't known for their moral scruples.

While separating families is unpleasant, and not something I support, it is worth noting that this is only actually being done to people who choose to ignore the legitimate process for requesting asylum and cross the border illegally. "Desperation" doesn't cut it as an excuse when the US is, in fact, processing asylum applications and many thousands of people are waiting their turn in the proper manner.

And, as @AFAIK points out: they are already in Mexico, a free, law-governed, economically developed and democratic country. If this is really about seeking asylum (rather than economic migration), they are welcome to claim asylum there. It has the added benefits of being closer to home and Spanish-speaking.

[One Degree]

"fuck those guys" the wise man said "it's their own individual fault for being threatened with violence and fleeing to a safe country where their children would have a future!"

It may appear that way, but I believe most of us have sympathy. There are different types of morality. I don’t think you can prove one is superior to another even though that seems the intent of those describing the differences.
In this instance, it is more about accepting our limitations and true equality. Where does our responsibility end and another’s begin. I believe our responsibility should be mainly limited to our own communities and then offer support to other communities in need in a limited fashion that does not disrespect those who created what we have. To open our borders under the assumption illegal immigrants are all good people with good intentions is not only naive, but abandons our first responsibility to our own community and to those trying to enter legally. There is no reason to give illegals priority over citizens and legal immigrants. This is not compassion, it is misplaced priorities.
As I suggested earlier, compassion is doing what we can without endangering what we have. This is what immigration laws are suppose to do. To replace a system meant to do this with open borders is irresponsible.
We also need to realize the arguments based upon “they are all innocent victims” and “they are all criminals” are both based upon the idea we should replace our vetting with assumptions based on feelings. Legal immigration is intended to figure out which each person is.

[Ter]

And, as @AFAIK points out: they are already in Mexico, a free, law-governed, economically developed and democratic country. If this is really about seeking asylum (rather than economic migration), they are welcome to claim asylum there. It has the added benefits of being closer to home and Spanish-speaking.

This is the fundamental truth.
We can only conclude that those people are economic migrants and that efforts to let them in and give amnesty is motivated by democrats who wish to use them later on as vote banks.

[mikema63]

I got halfway through writing a response before I realized it was pointless.

You all either know full well that Mexico is extremely harsh towards immigrants and asylum seekers or you didn't bother to check.

Why don't other people do the right thing is not an argument that we shouldn't do the right thing. Whining about Mexico is a distraction.

Particularly from the point of view of the start of this argument about taking children from their families for no reason. Which everyone seems to not want to back down from but desperately want to turn into an argument about anything else.

[Heisenberg]

I suppose you missed the bit where I said I didn't support separating families. Perhaps I didn't quite nail the required "performatively weepy" tone.

[Decky]

Immigration steals from the shit countries the exact people they need to become less shit, it only helps capitalists in the devolved world looking for cheap labour and ensures that the rich parts of the world get and even bigger slice of the pie and the poor parts of the world stay poor. Supporters of immigration are enemies of the developing world.

[mikema63]

I suppose you missed the bit where I said I didn't support separating families. Perhaps I didn't quite nail the required "performatively weepy" tone.

I didn't bother to read your response and it was aimed more at one degree than anyone, though I'd love to take a moment to poke at the performative jab.

I am entirely sincere, I have no particular desire to perform for you. I am under no illusion that I'll change anyone's mind. I consider it an ongoing tragedy and think the knee-jerk desire to define any heartfelt beliefs, feelings, or sincerity as cynical performance to trick you into agreeing or whatever is one of the defining and horrible characteristics of the age we live in.

I believe this very much, and I will not be shamed into not believing it or expressing it because you are annoyed that I think your being a dick.

[AFAIK]

If maximising utility is the goal then helping countries close to the source of displaced people deal with those people would be the best policy. The benefits include shorter, safer journeys for migrants, the ability to live in a host culture that is similar to their own, staying close to home makes it easier to return and money goes further in poorer countries so more people can be helped.

[Heisenberg]

Edit - on second thought, I can't be arsed.

[Suntzu]

Don't separate families, deport them together.

[Stormsmith]

You can tell how absolutely appalling this policy is by the fact that Trump has reversed every policy except the economic policies that President Obama implement. Instead, Trump's blaming this on Obama when in fact it's Trump's.

[mikema63]

If maximising utility is the goal then helping countries close to the source of displaced people deal with those people would be the best policy. The benefits include shorter, safer journeys for migrants, the ability to live in a host culture that is similar to their own, staying close to home makes it easier to return and money goes further in poorer countries so more people can be helped.

I'd bother to argue with you but you seem to think I am Mexican and have any control over Mexican politics.

Seeing as I don't plan to invade Mexico and force them at gun point to do the right thing then I can only advocate for the country I am a citizen of and have some tiny little bit of power to influence do the right thing.

Really this idea that because other people somewhere should do something we should focus on that and not do anything is pretty full of shit.

The goal isn't to have the world have perfect solutions. I do not have those. I have the ability to push for what I can, and changing the subject and whining about how someone else won't do it doesn't excuse you from stepping up.