Trump administration to start deporting critically ill migrants, including children

[Freighter]

So unlike most you are willing to say you want them to die.

I don't care what happens to them. If you are in a country illegally you should be deported, this shouldn't come as a surprise to them that can be deported for being there illegally.

Not caring if they live or die is not wanting them to die. Stop misrepresenting what I said.

Admitting your a bad person is more then most who defend this sort of thing are willing to do.

There is nothing bad in enforcement of a countries laws and regulations.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Not caring if they live or die is not wanting them to die. Stop misrepresenting what I said.


There is nothing bad in enforcement of a countries laws and regulations.

Wanting people who need on going life saving treatment to not be able to get that treatment is very much so wanting them to die.

And yes there is something bad about enforcing laws when those laws do nothing but kill innocent people. This is like basic shit.

[Ghostpanther]

Surely you see the internal contradiction here, right? Permission to shit on people's beliefs for putative contradictions, but creating a de facto ban on someone attempting to explain why they think there isn't a contradiction?

Ultimately, it's not my religion and I wouldn't invest much effort in defending it, but the defenses are really, really obvious to anyone that's not just looking for a snarky gotcha.

That is a excellent point. I agree.

But I will say, it is not against Christians standards to want the laws to be enforced. And it is up to Congress to make the laws and I would certainly support a law which did make exceptions for cases like this.

Also, I am going to wait until more reliable news sources come out to confirm this is happening before I pass any judgement on this matter.

[Freighter]

Wanting people who need on going life saving treatment to not be able to get that treatment is very much so wanting them to die.

If I wanted someone to die I'd just see to it to kill them. Not leave them to fend for themselves. So, stop misrepresenting what I said.

And yes there is something bad about enforcing laws when those laws do nothing but kill innocent people. This is like basic shit.

No, there isn't. Country A is not responsible for the well-being of citizens of country B.

[josykay]

If I wanted someone to die I'd just see to it to kill them. Not leave them to fend for themselves.


No, there isn't. Country A is not responsible for the well-being of citizens of country B.

Since they are in the USA, they are their responsibility. Saying, they will not hand out such special visas anymore to new applicants is one thing, kicking those out you accepted, and knowing they would die is just inhumane and cruel.

[Mayhem]

If I wanted someone to die I'd just see to it to kill them. Not leave them to fend for themselves. So, stop misrepresenting what I said.


No, there isn't. Country A is not responsible for the well-being of citizens of country B.

Your lack of empathy is frightening.

[Freighter]

Since they are in the USA, they are their responsibility.

No, they're not. The country they are citizens in, is.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

If I wanted someone to die I'd just see to it to kill them. Not leave them to fend for themselves.


No, there isn't. Country A is not responsible for the well-being of citizens of country B.

Taking some one Off life saving treatment with no way to get said treatment else where is killing them. Do you think if you pull The plug on some ones life support your not killing them just leaving them to fend for them selfs?

When you have are hurting and killing innocent people it doesn’t matter what country they are a citizen of.

[Elegiac]

No, they're not. The country they are citizens in, is.

Hm...

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Nope. Try again.

Noncitizens are entitled to judicial and legal protection.

[kaelleria]

For all of you participating in this thread... you're arguing with someone who thinks abortion should be illegal. Just consider the source and how their opinions are very black and white.

[Elegiac]

For all of you participating in this thread... you're arguing with someone who is against abortion under any circumstance. Just consider the source.

There's still something of a difference between just having a reprehensible opinion and flat out lying because they forgot the Fourteenth Amendment existed there for a second, kek.

[Endus]

So your position would be that anyone in the world that's sick and can't afford treatment at home is entitled to asylum in the United States? I want to make sure I'm not actually exaggerating the position. If that's not right, please clarify what you do mean.

My position is that if removing them from the country will directly lead to their death, they should be offered asylum.

It's really not that complicated a concept.

[Freighter]

When you have are hurting and killing

Drop the hyperbole. Nobody is being killed.

it doesn’t matter what country they are a citizen of.

What country you're a citizen in definitely does matter. You can't just go to a country and demand that they provide for your well-being.

[Spectral]

My position is that if removing them from the country will directly lead to their death, they should be offered asylum.

It's really not that complicated a concept.

So this extends only to people that have already successfully entered the country? Does it extend to family as well?

I'm not clear on the actual position people hold here. Is anyone that manages to get their sick kid across the border entitled to unlimited resources for medical care from the American government? If not, what are the appropriate limitations? Is there any age limit or are kids just being used because they're more rhetorically effective?

[Elegiac]

What country you're a citizen in definitely does matter. You can't just go to a country and demand that they provide for your well-being.

Sure you can. It's called claiming asylum and it's a protected action.

Again, you don't have to lie because you forgot refugees exited for a second there.

[Endus]

So this extends only to people that have already successfully entered the country?

That's standard practice for applying for asylum.

Does it extend to family as well?

You realize there's already policy in place to handle this, right? These are questions with established answers, why are you asking me?

I'm not clear on the actual position people hold here. Is anyone that manages to get their sick kid across the border entitled to unlimited resources for medical care from the American government? If not, what are the appropriate limitations? Is there any age limit or are kids just being used because they're more rhetorically effective?

Why are you imagining that this should only apply to children? They're the most egregious victims, but not the only ones.

Maybe you can justify letting people die because you don't want to make an effort to save them, when you could, but most people find that pretty heinous.

[Elegiac]

So this extends only to people that have already successfully entered the country? Does it extend to family as well?

I'm not clear on the actual position people hold here. Is anyone that manages to get their sick kid across the border entitled to unlimited resources for medical care from the American government? If not, what are the appropriate limitations? Is there any age limit or are kids just being used because they're more rhetorically effective?

Considering how good y'all are at determining what constitutes deferrable care so you can kick people out of hospital as quickly and cheaply as possible, I'm confident that the US will manage to come up with an appropriate answer to this bad faith question.

[Empte]

Maybe you can justify letting people die because you don't want to make an effort to save them, when you could, but most people find that pretty heinous.

This is such disingenuous bullshit.

Why are you not saving all the starving children in Africa? You're letting them die. You're a fucking terrible person.

[Infraction]

[Elegiac]

This is such disingenuous bullshit.

Why are you not saving all the starving children in Africa? You're letting them die. You're a fucking terrible person.

Largely because the starving children in Africa are kept as such by a kleptocratic postcolonial state being supported by the money Western companies shower onto them in exchange for raw materials and it is not within our means to assist them immediately.

As opposed to denying medical treatment to someone already....you know...here.

[Endus]

This is such disingenuous bullshit.

Why are you not saving all the starving children in Africa? You're letting them die. You're a fucking terrible person.

Because that's in Africa. African countries have sovereignty, y'know. We can't just walk in and take over. We can, and do, send support.

If countries are houses, and I'm taking a stance of "I'm not letting anyone die in my house, if I can help it", it's disingenuous as fuck to say "but someone else might be dying in another neighbourhood somewhere!"