Originally posted by KingsGambit
View Post
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.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Is this who you are?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostYou 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostWrong. 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.
You are burning a straw man.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostWho 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostWhere 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.
Do you think they actually made a policy that said, "hey let's separate families and make sure we can't reunite them?"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYou 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?"
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostWrong. 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.
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostI'd like to clear this up, since I may have improperly assumed. Do you support abortion on demand? If not, why not?
ThanksThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostSo 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostOK 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.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostI'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.
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostI 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.
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!The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAnd 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;
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Postalso, 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?The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostWhich 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostOK 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 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.
Who here has said it was a good policy to separate children from their families with no plan for reuniting them?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seer, Today, 11:42 AM
|
12 responses
64 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 07:55 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 10:24 AM
|
2 responses
37 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Diogenes
Today, 10:51 AM
|
||
Started by VonTastrophe, Today, 10:22 AM
|
4 responses
44 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Starlight
Today, 05:51 PM
|
||
Started by VonTastrophe, Yesterday, 01:08 PM
|
47 responses
248 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Today, 07:33 PM
|
||
Started by seer, Yesterday, 09:14 AM
|
193 responses
872 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Today, 08:56 PM
|
Comment