Immigrants have US Rights.

[smcop]

I agree completely with this. I have heard that claim before but from my research I find that is not true at all.

There is no abandoned families anywhere in the entire USA and for any family that has any difficulties there is resources readily available for anyone that has a real need.

So there are no families "abandoned" without support or "ruined" that leads the children to "jail" as that is just not the truth.

What we do have here created in the USA is a system that brakes up families and everyone suffers under the ignorant system and it needs to be repaired.

So we need to start helping families and stop blaming them.

You can't have it both ways. You want the govt. out of your life, but then you blame them for breaking families up. Kids end up in jail because they have no father figure, or their father figure is a deadbeat who refuses to support them financially or emotionally.

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

You can't have it both ways. You want the govt. out of your life, but then you blame them for breaking families up.

I have never truely said that I want the gov out of family business, I just want the gov to stop screwing things up.

I say we do need laws that protect the marriages and that defend the families.

What we have now is the opposite by having family brake-up laws.

Kids end up in jail because they have no father figure, or their father figure is a deadbeat who refuses to support them financially or emotionally.

I agree that children raised without their fathers (or without moms) is a big and real problem.

I say we must stop degrading the separated parents and stop attacking and stop robbing them and stop putting parents in jail for being poor which is what our gov does now.

What our society has been doing for years and doing more-so now to families does not help - it hurts families.

 

[This_person]

Hazleton Pennsylvania Federal Court decision, click link HERE.

Turns out that no person is an "illegal immigrant" until a US Imigration Judge declares that person as one.

Every other person has all the US Constitutional rights, thank God and the Federal Judge too.

I, for one, would like to thank Jimmy for pointing out the desparate need we have for walls stopping this influx of vermin into our country, and for stronger and more enforcement at our borders, airports, sea ports, etc. Clearly we have a problem with judicial activism that can only be stopped by stopping the influx if illegal aliens into our country, not through our activist court system.

Thank you, Jimmy, for making that case.

 

[godsbutterfly]

I agree completely with this. I have heard that claim before but from my research I find that is not true at all.

There is no abandoned families anywhere in the entire USA and for any family that has any difficulties there is resources readily available for anyone that has a real need.

So there are no families "abandoned" without support or "ruined" that leads the children to "jail" as that is just not the truth.

What we do have here created in the USA is a system that brakes up families and everyone suffers under the ignorant system and it needs to be repaired.

So we need to start helping families and stop blaming them.

I don't know where you did your research but I could introduce you to some live examples! While my ex was off living with somebody else (shame on the government for making him do that!) and I was struggling to support three kids and myself with only 1/3 of the income we used to have I was told that unless my ex would sign something saying he wasn't giving us any money I couldn't get any help - even temporarily. Well, he wasn't quite dumb enough to write up a nice little message to hang himself with! I had no relatives around who could help me. Don't tell me about no families being abandoned because you must not know what the word means in the truest context!

 

[This_person]

I don't know where you did your research but I could introduce you to some live examples! While my ex was off living with somebody else (shame on the government for making him do that!) and I was struggling to support three kids and myself with only 1/3 of the income we used to have I was told that unless my ex would sign something saying he wasn't giving us any money I couldn't get any help - even temporarily. Well, he wasn't quite dumb enough to write up a nice little message to hang himself with! I had no relatives around who could help me. Don't tell me about no families being abandoned because you must not know what the word means in the truest context!

He deserted his own family, and this is his means of looking himself in the mirror everyday (though you'd never know it by his hair). He believes that he didn't do wrong, and therefore no other abandoned family is actually abandoned. If they were, he would have been wrong, and Jimmy is incapable of believing he was ever wrong.

Ask him what actions he's taken to repent, he'll explain it better himself if you do.

 

[Lexib_]

Nice try JPC. the only reason this decision was made was because this judge interprets the state law to conflict with thefederal statute already in existence.



I believe this judge is wrong and his decision will be overturned on appeal. The states have not only the right but the obligation to adopt local laws that reinforce federal law. The states realize this problem isn't going to be solved by the fed so they must take matters into their own hands to protect their own communities.

What an Idiot. The judge has no clue ..... Vote him out!!!

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

I had no relatives around who could help me. Don't tell me about no families being abandoned because you must not know what the word means in the truest context!

I agree that the word "abandoned" is not being correctly put into context.

When two parents separate / divorce then that is not an abandonment.

And the broken family will have less money flow is much of what separation and divorce is all about and that is not abandonment either.

Then when poorer because of the sparation / divorce there are resources available and resources are much like the oposite of abandonment.

Demanding it be easy to go from marriage over to divorce without due hardships is enabling sin.


And for the thread topic : many if not most of the Latino migrants that come to the USA are Catholics and they make their marriages last through thick and thin.

Americans could learn much from those hard people that cross our border.

 

[This_person]

I agree that the word "abandoned" is not being correctly put into context.

When two parents separate / divorce then that is not an abandonment.

You're right. Desertion would be a better word. That was YOUR word (and action), wasn't it?

Then when poorer because of the sparation / divorce there are resources available and resources are much like the oposite of abandonment.

Yes, those resources are referred to as "support". They come from the deserting parent. Good job, Jimmy!

Americans could learn much from those hard people that cross our border.

Yes, like, how to break the law. How to violate the trust of those you wish to mooch off of.

I was surprised you didn't thank me for backing you up in the post above, where I said:

I, for one, would like to thank Jimmy for pointing out the desparate need we have for walls stopping this influx of vermin into our country, and for stronger and more enforcement at our borders, airports, sea ports, etc. Clearly we have a problem with judicial activism that can only be stopped by stopping the influx if illegal aliens into our country, not through our activist court system.

Thank you, Jimmy, for making that case.

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

You're right. Desertion would be a better word.

Your claim is just so pitifully shallow that it deserves contempt.

Change the word from "abandonment" over to "desertion" and figure now that makes you right.

Do not you ever get tired of these childish word games? I do.

My point still stands whether using this word or that word or if you find another word of the same meaning then my point covered it for all the words that mean the same.

DUH.

 

[This_person]

Your claim is just so.

Change the word from "abandonment" over to "desertion" and now that makes you right.

My point still stands whether using this word or that word or if you find another word of the same meaning then my point covered it for all the words that mean the same.

I'm glad we're still seeing eye to eye on this. Whether you claim deserting your family to figure it out for themselves or abandoning them, it's still just as terrible. Your point that those are things we need to publicly humiliate families for until they repent is correct!

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

I'm glad we're still seeing eye to eye on this. Whether you claim deserting your family to figure it out for themselves or abandoning them, it's still just as terrible. Your point that those are things we need to publicly humiliate families for until they repent is correct!

You change my words to fit your meaning.

That is just so disapointing.

Remember how you keep calling me the "liar" and now the rhyme fits on T_p as follows:

I am rubber and you are glue,

the lie bounces off me and sticks to you.

It is amazing how such things work when one stoops to the base.

 

[hvp05]

I have never truely said that I want the gov out of family business, I just want the gov to stop screwing things up.

I thought that bit was fishy... so I did a little searching.

We really need to get the gov out of the family business.

We do not need the gov monitoring the personal lives of our families. (Source.)

The big daddy gov needs to get out of families and let the people work out their own problems. (Source.)

So if you were not saying those statements truly, how were you saying them? Or were you being untruthful in today's post? Or was it simply that, in both cases, you were babbling and unsure of exactly what you were saying? (Hint: there is no good answer here - especially as a "candidate" for Congress.)

I think we need to begin keeping track of these statements like McDonald's used to keep track of their renowned burgers...

JPC: Over 2 million lies and contradictions posted!​

 

[godsbutterfly]

I agree that the word "abandoned" is not being correctly put into context.

When two parents separate / divorce then that is not an abandonment.

And the broken family will have less money flow is much of what separation and divorce is all about and that is not abandonment either.

Then when poorer because of the sparation / divorce there are resources available and resources are much like the oposite of abandonment.

Demanding it be easy to go from marriage over to divorce without due hardships is enabling sin.


And for the thread topic : many if not most of the Latino migrants that come to the USA are Catholics and they make their marriages last through thick and thin.

Americans could learn much from those hard people that cross our border.

Once again you did not correctly read and interpret my post. When a spouse/parent walks out of the door and leaves behind their obligations to their spouse and/or their children that is called abandonment - even in the eyes of the law.

No, there is not a support system for the custodial parent and the children until after many legal avenues have been gone down. Meanwhile you end up without a house and without food. Why is it the responsibility of my church to have to give my children and me a bag of food because their father chose to turn his back on them and on his vows? I didn't have enough money to do it all. I did what I could.

You continue to exonerate the one who walks out on their responsibilities and vilify the one who has to drag them thru the court system. Did I get married with the intent it would end in divorce? NO! Did I ask my husband to sleep with other women? NO! Did I give up too easily? I put up with his cheating and his abuse for 20 years so I don't think so. Did I ask him to leave us for alcohol and another woman? NO!

Why then should he get to walk away from those 3 wonderful children who had done nothing wrong? Society and the government didn't create them and they should not be responsible for helping me take care of them. HE should!

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

So if you were not saying those statements truly, how were you saying them? Or were you being untruthful in today's post? Or was it simply that, in both cases, you were babbling and unsure of exactly what you were saying?

I see I could have worded it better so I will clarify it now.

I am saying that the way the gov is intruding and messing up the family business then the gov does need to get out of the way it is messing the business up,

but when I say I want the gov to protect marriages and defend families then that is done from outside the family unit and not from inside the family unit as it does now.

Like ordering custody to one parent and cutting out the other parent is meddling inside the family and telling the family how to operate and how to live, while creating laws that make it illegal to violate a marriage / family by an outsider adulterer then that is not meddling inside the unit but protecting it from the outside.

I want the gov laws to protect and defend and serve, instead of intrude and meddle and destroy as it does now.

It makes sense to me.

 

[bcp]

I see I could have worded it better so I will clarify it now.

I am saying that the way the gov is intruding and messing up the family business then the gov does need to get out of the way it is messing the business up,

but when I say I want the gov to protect marriages and defend families then that is done from outside the family unit and not from inside the family unit as it does now.

Like ordering custody to one parent and cutting out the other parent is meddling inside the family and telling the family how to operate and how to live, while creating laws that make it illegal to violate a marriage / family by an outsider adulterer then that is not meddling inside the unit but protecting it from the outside.

I want the gov laws to protect and defend and serve, instead of intrude and meddle and destroy as it does now.

It makes sense to me.

thats all fine and dandy, but,
is tomorrow still "slap a mexican silly day"?

 

[This_person]

You change my words to fit your meaning.

You'd done it to me so many times that I thought you would enjoy it turned around. I guess I was wrong.

You did stop denying saying that you deserted your family, though. And, you must recognize desertion is about the same thing as abandonment, right? Even you understand the English language that well, don't you? So, the fun little play on your words was merely to point out that you do understand there are abandoned families, for you abandoned/deserted your own. I was just having fun, like when you dishonestly changed my words around in the elections forum....

However, you didn't correct me here:

I, for one, would like to thank Jimmy for pointing out the desparate need we have for walls stopping this influx of vermin into our country, and for stronger and more enforcement at our borders, airports, sea ports, etc. Clearly we have a problem with judicial activism that can only be stopped by stopping the influx if illegal aliens into our country, not through our activist court system.

Thank you, Jimmy, for making that case.

So, I can only assume you agree with this sentiment.

 

[This_person]

I see I could have worded it better so I will clarify it now.

You worded it fine, you merely got caught contradicting yourself. That happens daily on here

I am saying that the way the gov is intruding and messing up the family business then the gov does need to get out of the way it is messing the business up, but when I say I want the gov to protect marriages and defend families then that is done from outside the family unit and not from inside the family unit as it does now.

So, holding together from outside, not pushing apart from the family members themselves. That's the situation as it is now. Family members are the only ones who can break up a family, then they ask the court to recognize they've done this. Otherwise, they're married (held together legally from the outside) until they ask for recognition of their failure.

It's like when you deserted Junior and his momma (y'know, so they could figure it out for themselves). You were still legally married (held together legally from the outside, even though you destroyed their lives from within the family) until you were found and the outside force was requested to recognize your failure.

Do you get it now?

Like ordering custody

It makes sense to me.

That quote alone should scare anyone who knows you.

 

[hvp05]

Then when poorer because of the sparation / divorce there are resources available and resources are much like the oposite of abandonment.

No, there is not a support system for the custodial parent and the children until after many legal avenues have been gone down. Meanwhile you end up without a house and without food.

Oh, he knows his claims of "resources" are invalid... because I told him so 5.5 months ago - post 1; post 2.

He knows that it can takes days to weeks for a family's food stamp account to be set up, that, even once a family begins receiving FS, the monetary amount is extremely small, and, when it comes to welfare, a family's consecutive and cumulative amount of time spent on the program is rather limited. But he persists in asserting that these and other means are acceptable outlets through which custodial parents should seek support.

As long as nobody holds the non-custodial accountable.

It is pretty sad when someone who claims to want to politically represent this area does not understand the duties of the office they seek, nor their own platform, and has such low standards as these.

 

[Toxick]

You change my words to fit your meaning.

Dude - you change established dictionary definitions for all sorts of words and idioms to fit your meanings.

Don't shovel it if you can't take it.

Remember how you keep calling me the "liar" and now the rhyme fits on T_p as follows:

I want to side with JPC here, and say that he's not a liar.

That's right - I said it.



I think he actually believes the he spouts. And it's technically not a lie if you believe it when you say it.

I am rubber and you are glue,

the lie bounces off me and sticks to you.

The logic contained within the above bit of this doggerel will never - can never - be superseded. Ever!

 

[JPC sr]

The truth will set us all free.

Once again you did not correctly read and interpret my post. When a spouse/parent walks out of the door and leaves behind their obligations to their spouse and/or their children that is called abandonment - even in the eyes of the law.

Actually that is rightly called baseless slander accusations and it is not "abandonment" at all.

But I must agree that it is called abandonment ONLY by the law and the accusers but by no one else.

The accused feel no guilt under those accusations because they are baseless slanders and no real truth.

One BIG reason that the child support system fails today is because the custodials and the law expect us to believe their pack of lies about the children.

Like the un-truth that the family is abandoned when it is not, like the children are suffering need and they are not.

So long as the custodials and the law base their claims on false slanders as is done now then the resistance will grow, and rightly so.

No, there is not a support system for the custodial parent and the children until after many legal avenues have been gone down. Meanwhile you end up without a house and without food. Why is it the responsibility of my church to have to give my children and me a bag of food because their father chose to turn his back on them and on his vows? I didn't have enough money to do it all. I did what I could.

The Churches are a fine place to get food and assistance and there is always welfare and food stamps too for the very poorest.

But most custodials have a job and money for their own children.

Providing for the children is what "custody" means.

You continue to exonerate the one who walks out on their responsibilities and vilify the one who has to drag them thru the court system. Did I get married with the intent it would end in divorce? NO! Did I ask my husband to sleep with other women? NO! Did I give up too easily? I put up with his cheating and his abuse for 20 years so I don't think so. Did I ask him to leave us for alcohol and another woman? NO!

I do not justify the one leaving the family but I do not blame them either.

The separated parents are injured too and it is not a one sided event - except unjustly made one sided by the accusers and to the unjust laws.

Why then should he get to walk away from those 3 wonderful children who had done nothing wrong? Society and the government didn't create them and they should not be responsible for helping me take care of them. HE should!

The dad has lost his three (3) children and that means "lost" not "won" or "walked away".

You having the 3 "wonderful children" means you have the prize, you have the man's children, and you hold them captive like kidnapped prisoners so the dad must pay you child support cash or else he never sees his wonderful children again.

You are a kid-napper demanding ransom money and the unjust laws empower that wrong doing.

The custodial claim of being harmed by having their own God-given children is an ugly fraud.