DACA

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: KeithE

DACA

Postby Jon Estes » Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:43 am

Should the policy of DACA trump the LAW it conflicts with?

I think I understand the reason the policy was put in place (IMPO, mainly for political reasons - but nonetheless compassion is in it - I think)

On one side, if we say policy which conflicts with the law is fine to have, then the country could then be run by the Presidents pen. Depending on who is in the White House may determine who likes that sentence.

I'm of the stripe that says we either have a system to work within or we don't. I have never seen DACA as part of the judicial system.

Is it possible to deal with this in discussion judicially without the cry for compassion?
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: DACA

Postby Sandy » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:13 am

How can you discuss anything involving people's lives and leave out a cry for compassion?

This is a situation which occurred for which the law couldn't account. DACA was a plan which took into consideration the needs of the people involved under the circumstances. You have a group of people who came here as children, grew up here, and who for all intents and purposes are Americans. Rigid application of the law to the situation doesn't result in the greater good. The purpose of the law, at least in our Democratic Republic, is to serve the needs of the people, at least, according to its foundational documents. DACA fixes a unique problem in a way that is consistent with the way our national values are defined. Neither dreamers nor their families can vote, so it is difficult to prove any kind of political motive associated with it.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8130
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: DACA

Postby Dave Roberts » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:27 am

As best I remember, there was a provision in George W. Bush's proposal to a Republican Congress for immigration reform to deal with those brought as children. A GOP majority could not agree on how to pass this. Our immigration system is a mess dating back to its last tweaks under Reagan. Nothing as complicated as this can run without major revisions. I wish I had more confidence in Congress now. The mess is the fault of Congress who have not been willing to tackle the mess they have made.
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6928
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: DACA

Postby Jon Estes » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:33 pm

Dave Roberts wrote:As best I remember, there was a provision in George W. Bush's proposal to a Republican Congress for immigration reform to deal with those brought as children. A GOP majority could not agree on how to pass this. Our immigration system is a mess dating back to its last tweaks under Reagan. Nothing as complicated as this can run without major revisions. I wish I had more confidence in Congress now. The mess is the fault of Congress who have not been willing to tackle the mess they have made.


Dave - I think Trump made a bold and smart move and gave a six-month notice to Congress to do something right (fix the problem) or follow the law. To be judicial, congress must act - one way or the other. It is in the hands of Congress now. Trump did not start this mess, as you state, so the ones who messed it up must face it or face the ballot box.

Many fine US citizens oppose DACA... This does not make them bad or misguided people. I am very interested in watching how this ends up.

There are many laws I do not like - after driving on the Autobahn - speed limits is one ;-)
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: DACA

Postby Sandy » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:00 pm

Jon Estes wrote:Dave - I think Trump made a bold and smart move and gave a six-month notice to Congress to do something right (fix the problem) or follow the law.


Trump stuck his finger up in the air to see which way the wind was blowing, saw that keeping his oft-repeated campaign promise to sign an order rescinding DACA his first day in the White House was hugely unpopular, and passed the matter off to Congress. I would say that the odds of something useful (and compassionate) coming out of Congress are a bit higher for this, given the level of popular support for keeping DACA active.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8130
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: DACA

Postby Rvaughn » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:17 pm

I wrote a little bit about DACA today, and hope to write something more about immigration tomorrow (d.v.). I won't try to copy and paste it all here, so I hope you won't mind the link if you have any desire to read it: DACA, Trump, Obama, Congress and Children
http://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2017/09/daca-trump-obama-congress-and-children.html

I am in favor of something "DACA-like" for children brought here and now residents of the U.S. through no act on their on part. I am opposed to presidents making up laws when they can't get Congress to pass them (i.e., as in Obama creating DACA on his own in the first place). I hope that Trump's action yesterday will force the hand of Congress to do something.
Last edited by Rvaughn on Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: DACA

Postby Haruo » Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:10 pm

Sandy wrote:How can you discuss anything involving people's lives and leave out a cry for compassion?

Jon wrote:Depending on who is in the White House may determine who likes that sentence.

How true, how true.

Since DACA--not Trump, DACA, i.e. Obama--empowers the HSA/ICE machine to revoke anyone's DACA status at any time, it never did provide any serious protection, the safety was all based on executive whim. What really gets my goat as an American who would like to be able to take a little pride in his country but keeps running up against what it does, is the notion that kids brought into the country "outside channels" by adults might be held to have done something "criminal". Of course, I am not a fan of nation states or national borders, but even so, for crying out loud, kids??
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11624
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: DACA

Postby Haruo » Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:20 pm

Rvaughn wrote:I wrote a little bit about DACA today, and hope to write something more about immigration tomorrow (d.v.). I won't try to copy and paste it all here, so I hope you won't mind the link if you have any desire to read it: DACA, Trump, Obama, Congress and Children

I am in favor of something "DACA-like" for children brought here and now residents of the U.S. through no act on their on part. I am opposed to presidents making up laws when they can't get Congress to pass them (i.e., as in Obama creating DACA on his own in the first place). I hope that Trump's action yesterday will force the hand of Congress to do something.

Unfortunately I can't find the page in your blog; it says it "ne ekzistas" (doesn't exist):Image
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11624
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: DACA

Postby Rvaughn » Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:29 pm

Not sure what is going on. Tried to fix it (above) and will try here: DACA, Trump, Obama, Congress and Children

Must be some kind of conspiracy, since this page clearly does exist!
http://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2017/09/daca-trump-obama-congress-and-children.html

[Edited: Fixed per Haruo's keen eye and instructions!]
Last edited by Rvaughn on Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: DACA

Postby Haruo » Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:09 pm

Came up that time. Maybe the / on the end of initial URL is what tripped it up, since there shouldn't be one of those after an extension like .html ...?
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11624
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: DACA

Postby Dave Roberts » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:24 pm

Jon Estes wrote:
Many fine US citizens oppose DACA... This does not make them bad or misguided people. I am very interested in watching how this ends up.

There are many laws I do not like - after driving on the Autobahn - speed limits is one ;-)


Guess there is one gap with the supporters of rescinding DACA--their Bible lacks the Golden Rule.
"God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
User avatar
Dave Roberts
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6928
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: Southside, VA

Re: DACA

Postby Rvaughn » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:01 pm

Haruo wrote:Came up that time. Maybe the / on the end of initial URL is what tripped it up, since there shouldn't be one of those after an extension like .html ...?
Yes, that must be the problem. I didn't notice that. Thought I was crazy looking at two URLs that were just alike and never noticed the /. Thanks!
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: DACA

Postby Rvaughn » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:11 pm

Dave Roberts wrote:Guess there is one gap with the supporters of rescinding DACA--their Bible lacks the Golden Rule.
Dave, your response may fit some people who lack hearts, but it is just too cynical and derisive to describe many sincere believers who are trying to balance what they see as difficult-to-balance truths in the Bible. It is not always as clear-cut when disobey the authorities that we are told to obey as it was for Peter and John when they were told not to speak in the name of Jesus.

BTW, I favor rescinding DACA as an executive action and the Legislature passing a DACA law (or something like it or even stronger). That part is a matter of keeping our constitutional republic operating in good order and DACA is better if it is law and not executive action. We can hope (and write our representatives) that Trump's action yesterday will spur Congress from their inaction.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: DACA

Postby JE Pettibone » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:47 pm

Rvaughn wrote:
Dave Roberts wrote:Guess there is one gap with the supporters of rescinding DACA--their Bible lacks the Golden Rule.
Dave, your response may fit some people who lack hearts, but it is just too cynical and derisive to describe many sincere believers who are trying to balance what they see as difficult-to-balance truths in the Bible. It is not always as clear-cut when disobey the authorities that we are told to obey as it was for Peter and John when they were told not to speak in the name of Jesus.

BTW, I favor rescinding DACA as an executive action and the Legislature passing a DACA law (or something like it or even stronger). That part is a matter of keeping our constitutional republic operating in good order and DACA is better if it is law and not executive action. We can hope (and write our representatives) that Trump's action yesterday will spur Congress from their inaction.


Ed: Well said RL.
JE Pettibone
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:48 am

Re: DACA

Postby Haruo » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:21 am

Rvaughn wrote:I favor rescinding DACA as an executive action and the Legislature passing a DACA law (or something like it or even stronger). That part is a matter of keeping our constitutional republic operating in good order and DACA is better if it is law and not executive action. We can hope (and write our representatives) that Trump's action yesterday will spur Congress from their inaction.

Interesting that both Obama when he instituted DACA and Trump when he cancelled it urged Congress in very similar terms to enact it or something like it as law. It's embarrassing to me to think that it takes this sort of drama and trauma to get Congress to do something as obviously needed as this. Hopefully the aspects that endanger the kids' family members can be left out.
Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
User avatar
Haruo
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11624
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 8:21 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: DACA

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:38 am

Rvaughn wrote:I wrote a little bit about DACA today, and hope to write something more about immigration tomorrow (d.v.). I won't try to copy and paste it all here, so I hope you won't mind the link if you have any desire to read it: DACA, Trump, Obama, Congress and Children
http://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2017/09/daca-trump-obama-congress-and-children.html

I am in favor of something "DACA-like" for children brought here and now residents of the U.S. through no act on their on part. I am opposed to presidents making up laws when they can't get Congress to pass them (i.e., as in Obama creating DACA on his own in the first place). I hope that Trump's action yesterday will force the hand of Congress to do something.


I will try and get the reading done this coming weekend. LOts happening and free time is minimal. Thx for your comments.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: DACA

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:53 am

Haruo wrote:
Sandy wrote:How can you discuss anything involving people's lives and leave out a cry for compassion?

Jon wrote:Depending on who is in the White House may determine who likes that sentence.

How true, how true.

Since DACA--not Trump, DACA, i.e. Obama--empowers the HSA/ICE machine to revoke anyone's DACA status at any time, it never did provide any serious protection, the safety was all based on executive whim. What really gets my goat as an American who would like to be able to take a little pride in his country but keeps running up against what it does, is the notion that kids brought into the country "outside channels" by adults might be held to have done something "criminal". Of course, I am not a fan of nation states or national borders, but even so, for crying out loud, kids??


Not all who fit the DACA parameters are kids anymore.

Just a few thoughts not specific to Haruo's comments... God gave His people a nation with boundaries. Heaven has boundaries. God's compassion is holy and He himself will not save all - even though He could. God gave laws to follow. The US law to live in the USA must be done legally is not sinful or anti-people. I refuse to disregard the law because someone made a policy which is in conflict with the law. If this is the precedent one wants to set, please send Trump a letter telling him to make any policy he wants, regardless of law because it is the way we can get things done. But no... You want to cherry pick which laws to follow and which policies to support. When you become President, maybe you can do it your way but for the sake of the political system, let's do it the way it is intended to work. Congress make a law.

If compassion trumps law, that is dangerous ground. So many people are compassionate about so many wrong things. Pandora's box is what you will get and have to support it to have your compassionate desires met.

Enjoy the slippery slope. I 'll keep my feet on the judicial ground and fight to have it changed within the system if it needs to be changed.

Looks like the liberal cry... Let me change what needs to be changed so I get what I want, regardless of the law (I guess you could change that word "law" to "Bible" and it would still be the cry of the religious left). :-D
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: DACA

Postby KeithE » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:42 am

I will not argue directly with Jon Estes - we are poles apart in social, economic and biblical understandings.

But I will agree with Trump’s challenge to Congress to make DACA a permanent program. I also want comprehensive immigration reform that allows an increased but controlled amount of immigrants to enter the USA. More on that “control” later. Not sure six months is enough time to make DACA law (even for just DACA/DREAMERS Act) given everything else on their plate.

In the mean time, it should be made clear that all current Dreamers should be made to feel they are welcome here and will not be subject to deportation at any time. They have helped us economically and socially. Sessions' (and to a lesser extent Trump’s) warnings of deportation is only pushing good, tax paying and productive people away from the US through the fear of sudden deportation.

The US has been built by immigrants. Today much of the construction trades are done by immigrants (legal or otherwise). We need them now.

The predominance of studies have shown that immigration is good for the economy.
Peruse articles given here.
This report http://www.aijustice.org/the_truth_on_immigration has a good summary.

As for Trump’s succesful demagoguery that immigrants (legal and illegal) are likely to be rapists and generally despicable people causing economic harm in the form of jobs losses, he is dead wrong. Even the very conservative CATO Institute has studies that conclude:
In his first week in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the Department of Homeland Security to deport most illegal immigrants who come in contact with law enforcement.1His order is based on the widespread perception that illegal immigrants are a significant source of crime in the United States.2 This brief uses American Community Survey data to analyze incarcerated immigrants according to their citizenship and legal status. All immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than natives relative to their shares of the population. Even illegal immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than native-born Americans.

If any immigrant commit crimes they should be tried and convicted under US law and punishment/rehabilitation (another subject).

Now it is true that if we had a truly open borders, there is a potential we will accept more people than we can absorb. So I do favor registration and a controlled inlet valve.

How much can we absorb? It depends on how many jobs we can create with future enhancing, productive jobs. The Obama Stimulus program proved we could absorb millions of more jobs that were lost in the “financial crisis”. Look at it especially in the 2009-11 time frame.
Image
He changed a monthly net loss of 800,000 to an average of about a net of 180,000 monthly jobs added (Trump has continued at about that rate- nothing to brag about compared to what Obama did).

When Obama stimulus jobs happened, revenues more than paid for that initial cost ($800B over 3 years). He reduced that annual deficit from $1.5M down to about $450B where it has been stuck for several years. That drop in annual deficit has been over $1T/year for 5 years for a total of $5T deficits avoided vs the $800B stimulus. And despite the stimulus spending in 2009-2013, Obama made other spending cuts that kept total spending about flat from 2010-2014 (slight increases in 2015-7). STUDY the attachment by paging to the bottom, look at receipts and expenditures from 2009-2015 (with estimates for 2016-2020 if no major changes are made).

Now I’m no Obama fan - he was in fact the Deporter-in-Chief with 23% more deportations than Bush despite DACA. He (with goading by Hillary) has increased our military involvement in 7 Middle- Eastern countries with nebulous US interests or military goals that has resulted in millions dead - started by Bush, but Obama/Clinton grew it, and Trump is continuing that involvement.

But it is time for another big stimulus in the form of a jobs programs that will help the hurting middle/lower class. That could even change the annual deficit to a surplus (as it did in the Clinton era) and we could start reducing our cumulative National Debt.

The tax cuts under consideration now will only help corporations and rich people; it will not stimulate the economy - via trickle down or any other theory - and it will increase the annual deficit as it did (unarguably) with the Reagan cuts in 1982 and Bush in 2002.

Image

What is needed now is Jobs - infrastructure jobs (roads, bullet trains, smart grids, high volume internet,...), accountability agents (of govt and corp), green energy distribution points (production of solar and wind is already slightly cheaper than fossil fuels), rebuilding from Harvey/Irma/Jose, more firefighting capacity, bring back selected manufacturing jobs, ..... Such government job creation (funded encouragement to companies who were ready) was proven to work in the Great Depression under FDR (includes WWII) and for the Great Recession (aka the financial crisis) under Obama. It petered out when the stimulus funding slowed and the Republicans did not fund Obama’s American Jobs Act

As we go along in this job creating (and future enhancing) process, open up that control valve to let foreigners willing to work in. It may even bring out many Americans that avoid work (estimated at 20 million). We will all gain.
Attachments
hist01z2.xls
(37 KiB) Downloaded 6 times
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
http://www.weatherly.org/discoverycenter
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8362
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: DACA

Postby Sandy » Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:18 am

You have a law here that doesn't practically apply to anyone eligible for DACA. They are here, supposedly in violation of an immigration law, but their presence wasn't a choice they made, because they were children when they were brought here. The standard, conservative argument focuses on having this kind of law in place, and demanding strict adherence to it because it prevents people from "taking advantage of" the system, collecting welfare, being a burden on the tax system, or opening the doors to criminals to enter the US. But those who are eligible for DACA are, for the most part, gainfully employed, collectively as a group paid something like $6 billion in taxes, some serve in the military, and in order to qualify, you can't have either a criminal record or be on welfare. So that argument is moot.

Sure, some of those in DACA are no longer children. But if you've been here since you were a small child, and this is all you know, it doesn't really matter how old you are, you have become an American in every way except under what are some very pernicious, restrictive immigration laws that are not consistent with American values and principles. In a democratic republic, laws represent the will of the people, at least theoretically, and at some point, politicians become motivated to make changes if they sense that the expression of that will might affect them at the ballot box later on. This appears to be one of those issues on which the volume of popular support will lead to the desired change. No doubt that's why Trump didn't follow through on his campaign promise to eliminate DACA on his first day in the White House, but fobbed it off on Congress with a six month time window on it. In his case, his prejudice against the majority ethnic group involved is a factor. (And perhaps there are still some in Congress who have a good enough memory to note that 80% of the DACA group entered the US during the Bush administration, after tax cuts for the wealthy disabled the ability to adequately stop traffic over the border.)

This is a moral and ethical issue for which Evangelical Christians should be out in front using the heavy weight of Biblical principles and teaching on this issue to advocate for people who have a need and whom they should be supporting without reservation. Sadly, they are placing political loyalty over Biblical principle, while the Christians they love to badmouth as "liberals" are taking the lead and claiming the moral high ground on this issue.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8130
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: DACA

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:24 am

I am not sure if the Congress can move forward on something like this. The divide is so great that there is no more compromise to get something done that needs to be done. What we are left with is a law in place that we must follow. A system in place that isn't broken but the people in the system are (drain the swamp - not saying that in relation to Trump but my opinion).

400+ in Congress pass something they know the 100 senators won't buy. Gridlock will be the common theme. Oneman in an oval office (doesn't matter which side) will end up making decisions they want to make without concern for the hatred the other two branches have for each other. He has the executive pen -- they do not.

I remember when Obama care passed and the left stated clearly -- it's the law we have to follow. Those same people touting their self-perceived achievement need t sit down and remind themselves being here illegally is a crime - that is the law we have to follow. Picking and choosing which laws they want to follow has to stop. If you don't like it - work to change it. If it doesn't go your way - move on. A bunch of spoiled swamp creatures getting nothing done. A federal judge nominee is being grilled for being too Catholic. Idiocy abounds in DC and it's from those who have been and will be in DC more than 8 years.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: DACA

Postby Rvaughn » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:41 am

Jon Estes wrote:You want to cherry pick which laws to follow and which policies to support...

If compassion trumps law, that is dangerous ground....

Looks like the liberal cry... Let me change what needs to be changed so I get what I want, regardless of the law (I guess you could change that word "law" to "Bible" and it would still be the cry of the religious left). :-D
Jon, this is a topic I often find myself in the middle of, making comments and suggestions that satisfy neither those to the right or to the left. I just wrote something else today on the topic of illegal immigration, Beyond DACA: the Story of Jose. After reading your post here, though, I may need to go back and clarify some things. In it I pled for compassion, but I also agree with you that compassion does not trump law. We shouldn't just go around doing what we want to do regardless of the law. The compassion I advocate is compassion that needs to be considered as we try to deal with real people who are affected by the immigration laws -- and, where possible, write some of that that compassion into our laws. I want the "Jose" I reference in my story to stay in the U.S. I also want something that makes it legal for him to do so.

Another thing I consider refers to how we stress the rule of law for Jose, but often avoid it for ourselves. I like to see the speeder who is going 20 miles over the speed limit get stopped and fined, but complain when I get a ticket for going 5 miles over. We (generically) want the rule law to apply to Jose, but not to those who have aided and abetted in the 40 years he has been here.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Re: DACA

Postby Sandy » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:43 am

You can't compare immigration law with the ACA. Enforcing immigration law requires having the means to enforce it. The resources do not exist to deport everyone in the US illegally, and the prison system could not accommodate that many people. Those in DACA for the most part no longer have citizenship in their country of origin, so where do you deport them?

All that "drain the swamp" rhetoric is crap. Trump may have an "unconventional" approach in many ways, though I just see that as corruption and incompetence, but if there was a swamp before he got there, it's deeper, muddier and gloomier now. On the other hand, I watched my congressman go from being a loudmouthed basher of the ACA for seven years to casting a vote against repealing it because of the sheer number of emails and texts he got, and because he was pretty well shaken by the size and demeanor of the crowds that showed up at his town hall meetings howling for him to leave it alone. So he did. Public reaction to rescinding DACA is much larger than that was. You're looking at polls showing between 75% and 80% of the electorate who want to keep it, and who think Congress should pass laws along the same lines. You can ask Joe Arpaio if that kind of activity translates into votes at the ballot box.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8130
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: DACA

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:59 am

Rvaughn wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:You want to cherry pick which laws to follow and which policies to support...

If compassion trumps law, that is dangerous ground....

Looks like the liberal cry... Let me change what needs to be changed so I get what I want, regardless of the law (I guess you could change that word "law" to "Bible" and it would still be the cry of the religious left). :-D
Jon, this is a topic I often find myself in the middle of, making comments and suggestions that satisfy neither those to the right or to the left. I just wrote something else today on the topic of illegal immigration, Beyond DACA: the Story of Jose. After reading your post here, though, I may need to go back and clarify some things. In it I pled for compassion, but I also agree with you that compassion does not trump law. We shouldn't just go around doing what we want to do regardless of the law. The compassion I advocate is compassion that needs to be considered as we try to deal with real people who are affected by the immigration laws -- and, where possible, write some of that that compassion into our laws. I want the "Jose" I reference in my story to stay in the U.S. I also want something that makes it legal for him to do so.

Another thing I consider refers to how we stress the rule of law for Jose, but often avoid it for ourselves. I like to see the speeder who is going 20 miles over the speed limit get stopped and fined, but complain when I get a ticket for going 5 miles over. We (generically) want the rule law to apply to Jose, but not to those who have aided and abetted in the 40 years he has been here.

I think we are closer to each other on this than words on the screen show. I advocating for a law to be followed. If the current one is wrong, change it. If Congress can't or won't then follow the law as it stands.

America will not be the best country in the world if everyone gets what they want just because they want it That is not what freedom means.

I may take seriously the call for compassion when the ones calling for it, in this case, start showing compassion for the unborn. I am not saying all who are calling for compassion support abortion but the majority of the left politically, do.

Compassion is a cheap word if you only show it at those lives you consider worth having compassion for.

These comments are not directed at you RV, but the issue of selective compassion.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: DACA

Postby Sandy » Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:22 am

If you're in favor of enforcing the law, if Congress doesn't change it, then how do you go about doing that?

Jon Estes wrote:I may take seriously the call for compassion when the ones calling for it, in this case, start showing compassion for the unborn. I am not saying all who are calling for compassion support abortion but the majority of the left politically, do.


So your belief in the sanctity of human life is limited only to the unborn, and you favor only conditional application of this particular Biblical principle, you will only be compassionate or concerned about the condition of someone else's life if they accept your concern as a priority.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8130
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: DACA

Postby Rvaughn » Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:47 pm

Jon Estes wrote:I think we are closer to each other on this than words on the screen show.
Yes, I think you are probably right.
User avatar
Rvaughn
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 5:54 pm
Location: East Texas

Next

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest