Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate
From what I’ve seen, I would prefer to see fewer (or no) internal fences within the facilities and softer beds, but other than that, no. They are being fed, housed, and some are getting some education, and I would think that they are in a better condition now than they were while they were being transported and, possibly, when considering the totality of circumstances, in their original home.
|
Sorry, I just have trouble believing anyone thinks it’s ok for thousands of children to be spending weeks in detention centres with a legal limit of 72 hours, sleeping under foil blankets on mats on the ground within touching distance from others, going days without showering, at best getting “adequate” food and at worst missing meals, with no education for most and play time only when the room they’re locked in is being cleaned (if at all), with a complete lack of Spanish speaking workers and people experienced with at-risk youth.
The Government says these places are no places for children. It’s one thing to argue that this is a temporary issue, or that people shouldn’t be coming because this is where they end up, but you’re actually arguing that you see nothing wrong with these facilities. How do you square that, morally? Is there any example, in any moment in history, where any decent human being has looked at conditions like this and thought “nothing wrong here”? I can name a handful of human beings the very opposite of decent. But go ahead and give me one good person who that can look at this and think it is ok. Your value of these children must be so small. Do you even see them as human? I don’t ask to agitate, I honestly want to know. Removing the situation they came from and not using “better” as a substitute for “acceptable, would you wish this on another human?
If this is your example of having put some thought into the issue, this is good proof that thought alone has no value.