Yes. I place value on the lives of everyone. Even though I don't profess to be a Christian, isn't this a Christian principle?
I also understand that we can't save everyone, or we'll end up saving no one. But what I read here has an undercurrent similar to the reason there was a march on Selma. The right to domestic tranquility is broader than just the USA, particularly since we have meddled in the affairs of South and Central America for 195 years and are largely responsible for much of the narco-economies of those countries (if our citizens didn't use illegal drugs, we wouldn't have these horrendous conditions in those countries).
So, yes, we need to stop these migrants at the border, but we need to get out act together in this hemisphere.
So, via that logic, we use a great deal of petroleum products and have meddled in the ME for decades; so we must be responsible for that mess too?
What about the 'meddling' we did throughout the first world from 1941 to 1945 and then via the Marshall Plan
I accept no guilt for decisions long over and done with that I had no say in, for example The Missouri Compromise or Executive Order 9066 or The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution
Smells like [STRIKE]teen spirit[/STRIKE] an overly liberal education
Smells like a typical Bug dropping.
I have no willingness to address your alternate arguments when you rarely stick to the point raised.
He hasn’t weighed in yet on that. But it seems to me, the one is kinda half-assed nice. The other is definitely whole-assed nice.Has this been Rhino approved?