3 ms·
It's kind of like the difference between helping your own family and a stranger. If I take a stranger in, I will throw him/her out if they do unacceptable thin
by hackaflocka 11y ago
It's kind of like the difference between helping your own family and a stranger.
If I take a stranger in, I will throw him/her out if they do unacceptable things.
With family, I may not throw them out.
Refugees etc. are not born in the U.S. = strangers.
U.S. citizens born here = family.
- user_0001 11y agoWhy stop there? Anyone without family dating back say, more than 600 years - back to country to origin?
- scintill76 11y agoSetting aside your opinion on the transitive property of criminality, refugees probably do have some sorts of probationary legal status.. until they become citizens. It is apparently possible to be denaturalized[0], but it's not taken lightly. I guess you could argue for a new half-citizen class for refugees, or that refugees shouldn't be granted citizenship, but those would be too late to affect how this family has a legal right to be treated. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_citizens_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_denaturalized_former_c...
- mikeash 11y agoThat's an argument for deporting non-citizens who commit major crimes. And guess what? That's what we often do! But none of this is an argument for deporting or otherwise punishing the families of non-citizens who commit major crimes. How could you possibly justify that?