Give me your tired, your poor, and I'll take those babies away: A Treatise on the Border Situation.

If we cannot recognize both the cruelty of separating children from their parents at our border and who bears responsibility for this cruelty, I'm not sure we can claw our way back up this slippery slope.  Again I ask my friends and family who voted for Donald Trump: what are the limits of your tolerance for his actions?  Where do you draw the line?  If the tearing of children from their parents does not stir rage in you, what will?  That is not a rhetorical question.  How bad does it need to get?  Because that is what our president is testing.  The American president and his disciples ask—no, they condescendingly expect your partisan fervor to override your natural empathy for that instinctual panic of a child who cannot find her mother.  But the team conveniently provides an out for those of you (presumably good Christians) who hate what is happening to the poor children: they assure you they too, as parents and Christians, hate this abomination, but there is simply nothing they can do to stop it.  The blame falls squarely on their political enemies.  Republicans only control the presidency and both houses of Congress.  The buck stops somewhere else. 

If our president is such an expert negotiator (who, let's not forget, has all the power on his side), why does he need to use real-life, vulnerable children as pawns? This is the genius of Donald Trump, you say.  He’s effectively forcing a conversation.  Many methods are effective, even sanctioned by law.  But that does not make them all moral.  The ends do not justify the means.  This is not some brilliant move of brinksmanship to force Democrats to the table on illegal immigration.  This is only cruel.  Any fool can orchestrate inhumanity in an attempt to get his way.  The strategy is not only despicable, but shortsighted.  Who else has used this strategy?  How did that turn out?

We can even look at this “policy” specifically.  Who else in history has forcibly separated children from their parents?  Nazis come to mind.  Antebellum slave traders come to mind.  I’m no policy maker, but I’d think we could find better role models.  Though I guess we shouldn't be surprised.  Our president has expressed sympathy for Nazi demonstrators before our very eyes. Our attorney general, like his father and grandfather before him, is named after the president of the Confederacy and the man who oversaw the first attack on the Union. Still, emulating those who increase their power by degrading fellow humans seems at odds that old American fundamental “we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal”.  But maybe the founders really did just mean men, what with "original intent" and all.  Tough luck, women and children.*

Perhaps in the search for biblical justification, Sarah Huckabee Sanders alerted the president to the story of the judgment of Solomon, but he quickly got bored, heard the words "split the baby in half" and thought, "great idea."  Spoiler alert, Don: Solomon neither cuts the baby in two nor blames his murder of the child on the dispute of the mothers.  But in that movie, Republicans of Congress win best supporting actor in the role of the mother who is happy the baby dies.

*THANKS IVANKA