Your stance on whether ICE violates human rights of children is orthogonal to your stance on policies that ICE enforces and promulgates. It's not a political s

Your stance on whether ICE violates human rights of children is orthogonal to your stance on policies that ICE enforces and promulgates. It's not a political stance. In other words: You can be FOR the deportations and AGAINST treating children that way. You could be AGAINST the deportations policy and OK with the implementation on a human rights level. Something that seems increasingly the case is that people conflate objections to behavior with political stances. On the left this might look like "You are accusing Biden of rape because you oppose his policies." On the right this might look like "The investigation of Trump's dealings in Ukraine are the result of people trying to achieve political goals, they don't actually care about corruption at all." It is disheartening to see this sort of thinking spread. Hootsuite's decision on whether to deal with ICE can be part of a policy centered on human rights. It's not inherently political, just because ICE currently operates under Trump (many objected to many of its behaviors under Obama as well). (Incidentally, to the person I'm replying to, I'm not accusing you of sloppy thinking or anything else. I think it's very easy for all of us to fall into this trap because it has become so completely common in the U.S. to deploy rhetoric that all accusations we don't like are made for political reasons.)