Which children are at risk?
SINGLE FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS have become the norm in our country. Hearing about children who are not home at 2 a.m., or are missing for weeks or months because they have run away from home is common.
Sons join gangs. Daughters go and live with much older men, often before they have reached adulthood. The cycle did not just suddenly start with their generation, but is usually handed down from their mothers who often neglected them, and/or their totally missing dads.
The Democrats have usually been at the root of these issues; urban areas are frequented with young teens hanging out on street corners dealing drugs and loitering at all hours because there is no one home to care. Truancy in schools and drop out rates are at or near all time highs, even in suburbia.
Pregnant daughters are just children themselves, thinking their baby will be like a dolly to cuddle and love, to replace the love that they did not receive from their moms. But they will soon grow impatient when reality hits and they don’t want to stay in and care for the infant. They’d rather go out clubbing with their friends. So they leave the baby with someone (anyone they can find), and sometimes something bad will happen to it. Responsibility is a word that the Left has decided to throw out the window with the bath water.
Sometimes the bad thing happens before the baby is born, and the baby-momma goes and gets her child aborted because she doesn’t want to have to have that burden weighing her down, more than just in a literal way. And the liberals are happy to meet her demands by cheering her on in her choice for ending life and providing the means to do it.
And the Republicans continue to allow the biggest advocate of abortions, Planned Parenthood, to receive government funding. Even though those funds aren’t supposed to go to abortions, why is our government funding a “non-profit” institution at all when it donated $20 million to Hillary Clinton‘s campaign?
But now, now that there is an unverifiable number of foreigners clamoring at southern border states to get into our country under the guise of asylum, and they are bringing children with them — suddenly the liberals “care” about those children. Are they merely a liberal distraction?
What about those children? Who are they?
There are several different scenarios going on here. First, we have real families coming to the border. There are moms and dads and children. They somehow believe that the United States is their ticket to freedom if they simply ask for asylum. The definition of asylum is: the protection granted by a nation to someone who has left their native country as a political refugee.
But what is a political refugee? That is a mixed bag. Usually, we think of people who are under oppression; who may be in danger of losing their lives because their country is at war either with itself (Civil War) or with another nation, which, if it takes over, will kill citizens. But sometimes a country will just kill its own citizens for religious reasons or because of nefarious political factions, such as FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia) in Colombia, a guerrilla political power that kidnaps and often murders people who disagree with its objectives. People fleeing these situations have a legitimate right to seek asylum.
But where should people seek asylum?
Most of the people coming to the U.S. to do this must travel through Mexico. There is really no reason for anyone from Mexico to be seeking asylum in the United States. None of the above political or religious situations apply. So people are coming from south of Mexico to get to our country, obviously for other reasons than asylum, because if it is really asylum that could be granted, they could get that by asking Mexico when they arrive there!
Something else is going on, obviously; something that lined up, likely, with the actual enforcement of our illegal immigration laws which have been on the books since the mid-1990’s. Now that the Trump administration has finally decided to enforce the laws and deport people who have broken them, the foreigners are creatively seeking a brazen way to come here by not only seeking asylum, but by bringing children with them.
As I mentioned earlier, some of these people are legitimate families. But some are not. Some are bringing the children of other people, simply so they can have a shield to enter into the United States. If that is the case, we should not be concerned about separating the children from people who are not their parents or older relatives (Aunts and Uncles, or grandparents), but there should be a real safety concern of leaving them with people they aren’t related to.
It is very possible that the adult (who may also be very young) is bringing in the children for the purpose of sex trafficking, or to sell into the sex trade. It is also possible that they intend to abuse the children themselves. Our government needs to delve into each situation to determine if these children are safe.
This means we shouldn’t just immediately send them all home.
We need to take a look at the bill proposed by Ted Cruz (R-TX) where all the children and adults are contained together in a safe and comfortable environment, and monitored, but any known criminals are removed. The process of determining asylum legitimacy is sped up to 14 days and the number of judges working on the processing is doubled. All this would be done under this bill.
The children who do come with their parents then have no fear of separation, and we do not look like the big bad enemy.
But the left should be licking its own wounds as it looks at the damage it has done all by itself in elevating single parent family status and encouraging unwed mothers and abortions. The sanctity of life and the wholesomeness of families has been ridiculed for over 25 years by Democrats, and yet they are whining about foreign children being separated instead of looking in their own backyards.
Diane Feinstein’s (D-CA) bill, is based on a totally different premise, that being all families not only need to stay together but they should get to stay here. That is the part that people don’t want to talk about in the media.
The bottom line however, is that if there is no reason to be seeking asylum in the United States, these families and individuals need to be sent back to their home countries. I do advocate for a couple exceptions however.
If there are criminals found to be guilty of child sex trafficking discovered in this process, those folks need to be tried, convicted, and sentenced here in our country and be locked up for life with no parole, regardless of their age. Children who came with them need to be sent to their home country’s consulate with every effort made to locate their parents. There is a high possibility that they were kidnapped and their parents are terrified they will never see them again.
In the off chance these children have no parents, we can put them into our foster system for adoption. There are many families looking for permanent adoptions instead of foster children. Anyone wishing to adopt one of these children after it has been determined that the child is an orphan should have no fear that the foster system will remove the child and move it around in a flawed system. (That is an entire other story that needs to be told and will be the subject of my next book).
People who used children as shields just to illegally enter our country simply need to be deported.
The child needs, in this case, to be separated from the adult if it is not related to the person or was forcefully removed from its parents in the home country. Every effort should always be made to find the parent(s) of any child and reunite.
But no adult should be allowed to stay in the United States under the asylum laws unless they are a true political refugee. There must be a clear and present danger to their lives if they were to return home. I seriously doubt this is the case in almost every case.
Janice Barlow is a true crime author who also wrote a fictional account about her greyhound, Daisy. Her books are on Amazon under J.M. Barlow.