Mixed Signals on Immigration Enforcement

PASTOR JEFF: The jury may if the verdict or law is unjust and the judge may and often does show mercy based upon the circumstances

Absolutely incorrect! Judges are to interpret law, not make it. Judges must enforce law already made. Thank God our framers didn't think like this. Our govt. would have collapsed years ago.

I'm not talking about marrying immigrants just protecting them in a safe haven (sanctuary) during a time of storm-something that, in my reading of Scripture, nearly resembles the compassionate heart of God.>

Your reasoning is flawed. Thank God everyone doesn't demand safe haven. Common sense destroys your argument. Israel's borders were drawn and enforced for a reason.

Escorts...

Escorts, 15 King Street, London SW1Y 6QU, 020 3468 3019 ...

Proper enforcement of the law under the American constitutional system includes following due process (i.e., Amendment V: "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Note that it reads "no person", not "no citizen".) I encourage you to read this account of the raid at the meat packing plant in Postville, Iowa, written by a court translator. Then, after you read the account, come back here and tell us if the law was enforced properly, i.e., according to Constitutional requirements.

"sanctuary" (refuge, asylum, place of safety, shelter, safe haven)("Sanctuary was also a right to be safe from arrest in the sanctuary of a church or temple, recognized by English law from the fourth to the seventeenth century."-Wiki; literally "holy place") - Let me think about that in the context of your condemnatory judgment.

Tennis racquet...

[

As discussed here, the translator refers to the makeshift detention center as a "concentration camp". If you want to take the word of someone who's clearly an extremely ethno-centric drama queen, be my guest.

After the raid, the company was charged with over 9000 child labor law violations. All those who decry the raid would have allowed those to continue.

1. Apparently there's some confusion over what an ad hom is. It isn't an ad hom to point out that he's a drama queen - an unisex epithet - because that goes directly to his credibility. I find it difficult to believe anything he says due to the "concentration camp" bit, and I haven't seen independent verification of his claims.
2. Your comments that these people didn't know what they were agreeing to are implying that these people were completely stupid; perhaps you review that whole "noble savages" thing.
3. Those who are currently protesting enforcement - such as Sojourners - would have protested any form of enforcement and would have allowed the alleged abuses to continue. 9000, 10,000, 11,000 alleged child labor law violations, who knows how high it could have gone.

24Ahead:

I'm a composition teacher, so I think I know ad hominem when I read it. Your comment is definitely ad hominem--of the worst sort. Calling someone a drama queen is smear if ever I heard one. And I never heard the term used of males before, so calling it "unisex" after the fact is rather inane, isn't it? Ad hominem simply means that the arguer is attacking the character of the opponent rather than dealing with the arguments or claims.

And that perfectly describes what you are doing. You won't read his report because you are prejudiced by a slanted interpretation of the "concentration camp" comment. If you won't read his account yourself, frankly, you have no basis to call his credibility into question and no right to do so. If you want to even begin to sound impartial instead of biased, you would at least do that much.

Here's what he said: "The NCC [National Cattle Congress] is a 60-acre cattle fairground that had been transformed into a sort of concentration camp or detention center. Fenced in behind the ballroom/courtroom were 23 trailers from federal authorities, including two set up as sentencing courts; various Homeland Security buses and an 'incident respons' truck; scores of ICE agents and U.S. Marshalls; and in the background two large buildings: a pavilion where agents and prosecutors had established a command center; and a gymnasium filled with thght rows of cots were some 300 male detainees were kept, the women being housed in county jails. Later the NCC board complained to the local newspaper that they had been "misled" by the government when they leased the grounds purportedly for Homeland Security training."

You can object all you want to the "concentration camp" description, but this doesn't sound like Boy Scout camp either.

Regarding your second comment, have you ever heard the term "language barrier?" Again, read the account. Yes, there were Spanish translators there. But many of the detainees were Guatemalans who spoke only American Indian tongues fluently and their Spanish he described as "laborious." They had difficulty understanding the charges against them even when the translators tried to explain them in Spanish.

There were more violations of due process besides their not understanding what they were charged with that are not part of the translator's account. They included collusion between the prosecutors and ICE personnel on the one hand, with the federal judges on the other, to arrange for a predetermined "disposal" of the cases.

And for your third point, what basis do you have to claim that Sojourners would have ignored abuses and employment violations by Agriprocessors? Give me evidence that they would have ignored it. Since they regularly have posted cases of employment law violations (such as the tomato pickers in Florida), I can't see that this allegation of yours has any merit.

I think our immigration laws are unjust. You probably disagree. I can respect that disagreement. But even so it seems a stretch to compare undocumented immigration with violent crime.

And I think several groups of people might be terrorized by raids. Other undocumented immigrants, certainly. Their friends and relatives who have legal status, probably. Those two groups together form substantial communities. And then there are the people who hoped or believed in peaceableness and caring for the needy, rather than punishing them. These people might not be terrified, but I think they would be sick at heart.

1. It's not in any way an ad hom to point out that someone is inflating an account and therefore can't be trusted. And, when you refer to a detention center as a "concentration camp", you're clearly inflating an account.

2. There are three examples of "drama queen" applied to males on this page alone.

3. BuckeyeDon needs to work on his reading comprehension. I read the first part of his "report"; I stopped shortly after the "concentration camp" bit because I realized he was not a credible witness.

4. If this were just about having translators fluent in obscure languages, I wouldn't have much of a complaint. But, that's not what this is about. They're just using that as a peg on which to hang their hat: the one that opposes any form of enforcement except the magical variety where only the bosses are busted and the noble savage "undocumented workers" are let free in order to assuage liberal guilt and in order to form a power base.

I'm a composition teacher, so I think I know ad hominem when I read it. Your comment is definitely ad hominem--of the worst sort. Calling someone a drama queen is smear if ever I heard one. And I never heard the term used of males before, so calling it "unisex" after the fact is rather inane, isn't it? Ad hominem simply means that the arguer is attacking the character of the opponent rather than dealing with the arguments or claims.

5. Show me an example of Sojourners or their buddies supporting enforcement except in name only.

If you were in my class and submitted an essay with this argument, your grade would be marked down for use of ad hominem. And I know that the other faculty would back me up, if it came to that. I can't be any clearer than that; you can deny it if you want, but you are still attacking the person's character rather than dealing with anything he actually wrote about in his report. That's the essence of ad hominem.

And I take issue with the notion that he's inflating the account. His account is a personal observation; if the detention/processing area reminded him of a concentration camp, then he's inflating nothing to mention that.

I could just as easily accuse you of inflating the account with your mention of sawed-off jeans.

You gave no indication whatever that you read any part of the report. You said you got your information about it from a right-wing rag. There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension.

You are right: it's about far more than language barrier. But I'm wasting my time continuing this conversation, because you obviously don't have ears to hear anything that doesn't jive with your ideology.

Have a nice day.

Proper enforcement of the law under the American constitutional system includes following due process (i.e., Amendment V: "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Note that it reads "no person", not "no citizen".) I encourage you to read this account of the raid at the meat packing plant in Postville, Iowa, written by a court translator. Then, after you read the account, come back here and tell us if the law was enforced properly, i.e., according to Constitutional requirements.

"sanctuary" (refuge, asylum, place of safety, shelter, safe haven)("Sanctuary was also a right to be safe from arrest in the sanctuary of a church or temple, recognized by English law from the fourth to the seventeenth century."-Wiki; literally "holy place") - Let me think about that in the context of your condemnatory judgment.

As discussed here, the translator refers to the makeshift detention center as a "concentration camp". If you want to take the word of someone who's clearly an extremely ethno-centric drama queen, be my guest.

After the raid, the company was charged with over 9000 child labor law violations. All those who decry the raid would have allowed those to continue.

1. Apparently there's some confusion over what an ad hom is. It isn't an ad hom to point out that he's a drama queen - an unisex epithet - because that goes directly to his credibility. I find it difficult to believe anything he says due to the "concentration camp" bit, and I haven't seen independent verification of his claims.
2. Your comments that these people didn't know what they were agreeing to are implying that these people were completely stupid; perhaps you review that whole "noble savages" thing.
3. Those who are currently protesting enforcement - such as Sojourners - would have protested any form of enforcement and would have allowed the alleged abuses to continue. 9000, 10,000, 11,000 alleged child labor law violations, who knows how high it could have gone.

PASTOR JEFF: The jury may if the verdict or law is unjust and the judge may and often does show mercy based upon the circumstances

Absolutely incorrect! Judges are to interpret law, not make it. Judges must enforce law already made. Thank God our framers didn't think like this. Our govt. would have collapsed years ago.

I'm not talking about marrying immigrants just protecting them in a safe haven (sanctuary) during a time of storm-something that, in my reading of Scripture, nearly resembles the compassionate heart of God.>

Your reasoning is flawed. Thank God everyone doesn't demand safe haven. Common sense destroys your argument. Israel's borders were drawn and enforced for a reason.

1. It's not in any way an ad hom to point out that someone is inflating an account and therefore can't be trusted. And, when you refer to a detention center as a "concentration camp", you're clearly inflating an account.

2. There are three examples of "drama queen" applied to males on this page alone.

3. BuckeyeDon needs to work on his reading comprehension. I read the first part of his "report"; I stopped shortly after the "concentration camp" bit because I realized he was not a credible witness.

4. If this were just about having translators fluent in obscure languages, I wouldn't have much of a complaint. But, that's not what this is about. They're just using that as a peg on which to hang their hat: the one that opposes any form of enforcement except the magical variety where only the bosses are busted and the noble savage "undocumented workers" are let free in order to assuage liberal guilt and in order to form a power base.

I'm a composition teacher, so I think I know ad hominem when I read it. Your comment is definitely ad hominem--of the worst sort. Calling someone a drama queen is smear if ever I heard one. And I never heard the term used of males before, so calling it "unisex" after the fact is rather inane, isn't it? Ad hominem simply means that the arguer is attacking the character of the opponent rather than dealing with the arguments or claims.

5. Show me an example of Sojourners or their buddies supporting enforcement except in name only.

PASTOR JEFF: The jury may if the verdict or law is unjust and the judge may and often does show mercy based upon the circumstances

Absolutely incorrect! Judges are to interpret law, not make it. Judges must enforce law already made. Thank God our framers didn't think like this. Our govt. would have collapsed years ago.

I'm not talking about marrying immigrants just protecting them in a safe haven (sanctuary) during a time of storm-something that, in my reading of Scripture, nearly resembles the compassionate heart of God.>

Your reasoning is flawed. Thank God everyone doesn't demand safe haven. Common sense destroys your argument. Israel's borders were drawn and enforced for a reason.

I would think so.

More importantly, is a whole community really "terrorized" by an immigration raid. I have lived in rural Florida where INS raids took place. Terror? No, only for those who knew they had broken the law and feared its enforcement. Under this concept, lets not terrorize neighborhoods or communities who now see a great deal of economic activity around the activities of street gangs, either.

Police Car Auctions...

Hi! I could have sworn I've been to this site before but after browsing through some of the post I realized it's new to me. Nonetheless, I'm definitely delighted I found it and I'll be bookmarking and checking back frequently!...