Is this who you are?

[lilpixieofterror]

Depends on what type of dessert it was

[Charles]

You appear to be arguing that it is never, ever good policy to do so, regardless of what negative consequences for the children may occur if they are kept together, and regardless of the child's actual relationship with the purported parent.

Wrong. I have mentioned several times that in certain situation it can be in the childs best interest. My point is that it is never ever good policy to do so as a general policy resulting in more than 2000 children separeted from their parents and then with no plan for reuniting them.

[Sparko]

Wrong. I have mentioned several times that in certain situation it can be in the childs best interest. My point is that it is never ever good policy to do so as a general policy resulting in more than 2000 children separeted from their parents and then with no plan for reuniting them.

Who here has said it was a good policy to separate children from their families with no plan for reuniting them?

You are burning a straw man.

[Charles]

Who here has said it was a good policy to separate children from their families with no plan for reuniting them?

You are burning a straw man.

Where did I claim anyone here had said that? Who is burning the straw man? Some of you support the administration who did it and are quite eager to avoid having to face the consequences but that is another thing.

[Sparko]

Where did I claim anyone here had said that? Who is burning the straw man? Some of you support the administration who did it and are quite eager to avoid having to face the consequences but that is another thing.

You have been claiming it all along. Otherwise what the hell are you even arguing about here?

Do you think they actually made a policy that said, "hey let's separate families and make sure we can't reunite them?"

[Charles]

You have been claiming it all along. Otherwise what the hell are you even arguing about here?

Do you think they actually made a policy that said, "hey let's separate families and make sure we can't reunite them?"

So you say i have been claimning it all along and yet you can't show a single instance? And find a proper tone, Sparko. We are on a Christian forum so don't use that "what the ..." expression.

I guess the Trump administration was too eager to to show their zero tolerance that they forgot they needed a plan to reunite children with their parents. Or perhaps there is another reason. Anyway the fact they had no plan shows their complete incompetence.

[Cow Poke]

Wrong. I have mentioned several times that in certain situation it can be in the childs best interest. My point is that it is never ever good policy to do so as a general policy resulting in more than 2000 children separeted from their parents and then with no plan for reuniting them.

Any reason you can't directly answer the questions on abortion, aside from feigning insult on being asked?

I'd like to clear this up, since I may have improperly assumed. Do you support abortion on demand? If not, why not?

Let's please have you deal with this part of OBP's post you ignored.

Thanks

[Sparko]

So you say i have been claimning it all along and yet you can't show a single instance? And find a proper tone, Sparko. We are on a Christian forum so don't use that "what the ..." expression.

I guess the Trump administration was too eager to to show their zero tolerance that they forgot they needed a plan to reunite children with their parents. Or perhaps there is another reason. Anyway the fact they had no plan shows their complete incompetence.

OK I guess if you never accused any of us of supporting such a plan then your entire last dozen posts are null and void. Nice to hear it. I guess you can stop posting now. Buh-bye.

[Cow Poke]

OK I guess if you never accused any of us of supporting such a plan then your entire last dozen posts are null and void. Nice to hear it. I guess you can stop posting now. Buh-bye.

I'd like him to give a clear answer to OPB's request. Getting an answer from him on abortion is like nailing jello to a tree. But I suspect I know why.

[Sparko]

I'd like him to give a clear answer to OPB's request. Getting an answer from him on abortion is like nailing jello to a tree. But I suspect I know why.

I think he told me once a while back he is pro-life. Or maybe that was carp.

So if he is prolife then he should support those who voted for Trump over Hillary. Hillary not only supported abortion, but Partial Birth Abortion. And abortion actually KILLS babies not just loses some in the system. By the hundreds of thousands.

As far as I can tell, only a few children have not been able to be united with their parents and it is due to various factors, like some of them were being trafficked by people who were NOT their parents. It is not a policy like Charles seems to think.

[Cow Poke]

I think he told me once a while back he is pro-life. Or maybe that was carp.

So if he is prolife then he should support those who voted for Trump over Hillary. Hillary not only supported abortion, but Partial Birth Abortion. And abortion actually KILLS babies not just loses some in the system. By the hundreds of thousands.

As far as I can tell, only a few children have not been able to be united with their parents and it is due to various factors, like some of them were being trafficked by people who were NOT their parents. It is not a policy like Charles seems to think.

And that's exactly what I suspect - if he truly is pro-life, then all his attacks against Trump "and the children" is a steaming load of horsie poo, and Charles is one of the biggest hypocrites on the planet.

I think that's why he's dancing around answering the question.

A) vote for a man who promised to do us right on SCOTUS, and actually DID, and who, subsequently (and with no way of us knowing he would) implementing a policy that Charles doesn't like
2) vote for a woman who would most certainly aid and abet the continuing genocide of innocent unborn children - and we clearly knew that up front!

You gots a lot of splainin' to do, Charles!

[Sparko]

And that's exactly what I suspect - if he truly is pro-life, then all his attacks against Trump "and the children" is a steaming load of horsie poo, and Charles is one of the biggest hypocrites on the planet.

I think that's why he's dancing around answering the question.

A) vote for a man who promised to do us right on SCOTUS, and actually DID, and who, subsequently (and with no way of us knowing he would) implementing a policy that Charles doesn't like
2) vote for a woman who would most certainly aid and abet the continuing genocide of innocent unborn children - and we clearly knew that up front!

You gots a lot of splainin' to do, Charles! :glare;

also, just doing some more research, all of the articles about the children not being reunited with their parents seem to be about "maybe" and "possibly" and "could be" - all scare tactics and what-ifs. I haven't seen any actual cases reported. I am sure they could be a few, things happen. but if it is thousands like Chuck keeps saying, where are they? Why isn't anyone reporting on it actually happening?

[Cow Poke]

also, just doing some more research, all of the articles about the children not being reunited with their parents seem to be about "maybe" and "possibly" and "could be" - all scare tactics and what-ifs. I haven't seen any actual cases reported. I am sure they could be a few, things happen. but if it is thousands like Chuck keeps saying, where are they? Why isn't anyone reporting on it actually happening?

Which goes back to the point - I don't think these people are NEARLY as concerned about the actual children as they are using that issue to slam Trump.

[Sparko]

Which goes back to the point - I don't think these people are NEARLY as concerned about the actual children as they are using that issue to slam Trump.

And chuck just seems interested in using it as a club to beat Christians up with. He doesn't seem to know any of the facts. He didn't even know congress was the ones who set up the system in the first place and Trump signed an executive order ending it. And congress still hasn't fixed it!

[Charles]

OK I guess if you never accused any of us of supporting such a plan then your entire last dozen posts are null and void. Nice to hear it. I guess you can stop posting now. Buh-bye.

Sparko, you are being dishonest, and you know it.

I wrote:

My point is that it is never ever good policy to do so as a general policy resulting in more than 2000 children separeted from their parents and then with no plan for reuniting them.

You then asked:

Who here has said it was a good policy to separate children from their families with no plan for reuniting them?

I then made it clear to you that I have never claimed anyone of you had said so. But you had supported the president who was responsible for it. And you had downplayed and some of you continue to downplay the significance of what has been going on in this incompetent and inhuman administration.