Latest activity

iluvatar5150 · Nov 4, 2025

Delvianna said:
Did I say it was just google searches? You make a lot of assumptions about what I do/don't do, my motives, and my thoughts. How about asking instead of assume?

I did ask, in post 20. Remember?

Ok, so you think that by deadnaming somebody, you're helping them. Why do you think that? What do you know about mental disorders? Are you a mental health professional or have some experience with it yourself? What do you know about transgenderism?

Your entire answer was, “I've done a lot of research to aid my decision.”

You’re free to go into greater detail at any time.

Delvianna said:
This is against biblical ethics.

No, it’s against your specific flavor of Christian ethics and your interpretation of scripture. It’s not against mine and my theology isn’t particularly liberal. I don’t know why it should be treated differently than any other corrective surgery.

Delvianna said:
We are not supposed to do nothing when it comes to sin regardless of the topic. So if you want to keep bringing up your maiden last name example, as I said, it still doesn't fit when I believe it is biblically inaccurate. By wordly standards its "being a jerk" but by Gods standards, its not enabling sin or destructive behavior.

The analogy is applicable because in both situations, the accuser thinks they’re correct in pointing out sin and the accused disagrees.

Am I understanding you correctly in that you think I would be exhibiting love in insisting on calling you by your maiden name even if you thought I was interpreting scripture incorrectly?

Delvianna said:
The bible is against even tattoos, how do you think he feels about cutting off genitals and adding fake implants?

The same passage prohibits cross-breeding cattle and blending fabrics. I think we’re well beyond using that as a justification for much of anything.

Delvianna said:
And by the way, I do have some medical background and understand what the synthetic hormones does to your body.

So? Lots of medication has all kinds of effects on people.

Delvianna said:
Your way of debating makes me think you spend too much time on Reddit by your assumptions and extreme arguments approach. You paint me with a broad brush and just automatically think that I think a certain way or do something or haven't done something because it seems like the people you converse with are immature and do those things on a regular basis, but I suggest you don't do this with everyone. Let people speak for themselves instead of inserting your own information that you make up and then accuse me of. This isn't how you should talk to anyone regardless of who they are.

I am coming on strong, but I would argue that the approach you’re advocating is at least as aggressive and at least as presumptive.

Sure, your approach is wrapped in a more genteel veneer, but when you unpack it, it’s just as bad. You’re presuming to know a lot more about mental illness in general and transgenderism specifically than you actually do. You’re presuming that your interpretation of scripture is so robust that it’s appropriate to just foist on people in public. Have you listened to any trans people who haven’t de-transitioned “speak for themselves instead of inserting your own information”? Because I have and their descriptions of their motivations are striking in their similarity to one another but bear almost no resemblance to the descriptions I hear from folks who think it appropriate to deadname them deliberately.

Chesterton · Nov 4, 2025

partinobodycular said:
Very true, but give AI a year, or five years, or twenty.

I don't see any point to it, other than creative businesses saving a bunch of money by not having to pay humans. There's no benefit to me.

partinobodycular said:
I've been waiting for a music sharing service that could actually figure out what I like since Napster. Every attempt has been laughable. Finally there's hope that AI will actually play songs that I like.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Why do you need a service to figure out what you like? Don't you just like what you like? Are you talking about finding new music that you haven't heard of yet?

Daniel Martinovich · Nov 4, 2025

Richard T said:
Thanks for your response. I don't know the historic context of the press very well but it seems like the Jefferson quote reflects it was not like social media. But I guess it matters little, because the point is that thoughts and writings should not be prohibited, except slander. It seems you are arguing against the freedom of the professional press but I am not sure why? That even if the more modern interpretation is used, what is the harm? You want to regulate it more?

I think too with God overall the form of government is not as perhaps as important as the justice it serves. I certainly do not think God likes government to be self serving, corrupt or co-opted in ways that show favoritism to certain groups, races or classes. Anyway, I am glad you provoked my thoughts on this topic. By all means, I hope you continue to share your views.

No I’m not trying to regulate it. But it has tried to regulate us, the population and has used its influence to get the government to regulate us.

I guess I’m just trying to get folks to view the first ammendment in its entirety for what it was rather than the modern view of it.

Hentenza · Nov 4, 2025

SabbathBlessings said:
Strange it wasn't posted but the very next verse gives us the context of who was at fault and why....

8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord

The covenant was not the issue, why He wrote the exact words of the covenant Psa89:34 Exo34:28 2Cor3:3 just established His New Covenant on better promises Heb8:6 (if we cooperate with Him) on what He will do, if we allow Him to Heb8:10 John14:15-18

“When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭8‬:‭13‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Hebrews 8:13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.

bible.com

The covenant was indeed the problem. No one could keep it perfectly so God had to send His beloved Son to die for our sins and fulfill the old covenant. The law was always the problem.

The Liturgist · Nov 4, 2025

Gregory Thompson said:
I wonder if the catechism has been updated.

The Blessed Virgin Mary was never officially referred to as co-Redemptrix. The group advocating for this “Fifth Dogma” was doing so based on a peculiar threatening vision of “the Lady who was once called Mary” by a Dutch woman named Ida Peerdeman, which was consistently declared unworthy of belief by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which is now the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, but still the same entity basically.

Always in His Presence said:
Vatican nixes use of ‘Co-Redemptrix’ as title for Mary

Vatican City, Nov 4, 2025 / 08:15 am

The Vatican’s doctrinal office said Tuesday the title of “Co-Redemptrix” is not an appropriate way to describe Mary’s participation in salvation.

In Mater Populi Fidelis (“The Mother of the Faithful People of God”), the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) said when an expression requires frequent explanation to maintain the correct meaning, it becomes unhelpful.

“In this case, the expression ‘co-redemptrix’ does not help extol Mary as the first and foremost collaborator in the work of redemption and grace, for it carries the risk of eclipsing the exclusive role of Jesus Christ,” according to the doctrinal note, released Nov. 4.

Pope Leo XIV approved the document, signed by DDF prefect Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, on Oct. 7.

The title of your thread is misleading, since the Vatican never officially used this title to refer to the Blessed Virgin Mary and had ruled the vision used to justify support for declaring the Theotokos to be “co-Reemptrix” by advocates of the “Fifth Dogma” as unworthy of belief.

And they have also only precluded the use of this particular title for the Theotokos, which is a relief for myself and other Orthodox Christians and traditional Catholics, who support the extreme veneration of Our Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary while being staunchly opposed to both Collyridianism (the worship of her) and Antidicomarianism (refusal to venerate the Theotokos or to acknowledge her perpetual virginity) and Nestorianism (refusal to refer to Our Lady as Theotokos).

All accepted titles for the Blessed Virgin Mary remain in use, according to this decision, for she is the Mother of God, in whose womb was contained the Only Begotten Son and Word of God, who created the cosmos, and who is uncontainable, and from whom He put on our human nature, facilitating His salvation of us on the Cross, where the King of Glory trampled down death by death, thus saving His mother and humanity from the deadly wages of sin, so that those who believe on Him shall enjoy everlasting life (John 3:16) through the grace of the Holy Spirit, particularly as received through baptism, whether the baptism of blood or desire such as that of the Good Thief or the baptism of water, and Holy Communion.

Now if only the Vatican would do something about Traditiones Custodes and also liberation theology and the liberal bishops in Germany.

Carl Emerson · Nov 4, 2025

SabbathBlessings said:
So you're taking back what you said before was clear and plain.

Are you now saying God was at fault because they broke the covenant and did not continue in it? He said there would not have not been a need for a new covenant had they not broke it. There was no either or, it was them who broke the covenant, there was nothing wrong with God's Testimony Exo31:18 His covenant Exo28:34 Deut4:13 written by the Holy Spirit of Truth, its perfect for converting the soul. Ps19:7 The issue is man, not God.

Sorry if I wasn't clear...

First can you quote me saying God was at fault ??? I wouldn't have thought you would falsely accuse me as well ?

Heb 8 says...

6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, to the extent that He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been free of fault, no circumstances would have been sought for a second.

Do you think it was God's fault that the first covenant had faults ?

I don't.

FreeinChrist · Nov 4, 2025

FactChecking Trump's "60 Minutes" Interview - FactCheck.org

In a lengthy "60 Minutes" interview, President Donald Trump made false and questionable claims about nuclear weapons testing, inflation and military strikes in the Caribbean Sea. He also repeated numerous misleading claims he has made before on a range of topics.

www.factcheck.org

Trump claimed that every boat the U.S. military has blown up in the Caribbean Sea since early September “kills 25,000 Americans” with illegal drugs. With nine boat strikes, that would be well over the total U.S. drug overdose deaths in 2023 and 2024. The administration hasn’t provided details on the boats’ cargo.

In talking about the reasons for the boat strikes, Trump repeated his unsupported claim that Venezuela emptied “their prisons” and “mental institutions” into the U.S. through illegal immigration. Experts, including in Venezuela, told us there’s no evidence for that......

Indictments: O’Donnell cited the recent indictments of former FBI Director James Comey, former National Security Adviser John Bolton and New York Attorney General Letitia James — “all public figures who have publicly denounced you” — and asked Trump if their indictments were “political retribution.” “Did you instruct the Department of Justice to go after them?” O’Donnell asked. Trump responded, “No, and not in any way, shape or form.”

But in a Sept. 20 post on Truth Social, apparently addressed to Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump cited social media posts calling for the prosecution of Comey, James and Sen. Adam Schiff. “They’re all guilty as hell,” Trump’s post said, adding, “We can’t delay any longer … JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”

Comey was indicted five days later on Sept. 25 on charges of lying to Congress. James was indicted on Oct. 9 on charges of mortgage fraud. And Bolton was indicted on Oct. 16 for mishandling classified national defense information obtained during his tenure in the first Trump administration. As we wrote, some legal analysts have said that the government appears to have a strong case against Bolton – more so than it does against Comey or James.

The cases against Comey and James are falling apart badly.

Konnie King · Nov 4, 2025

The Perils of Penelope Pitstop

Studyman · Nov 4, 2025

Carl Emerson said:
Phil 3:2 Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision;
3 for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and take pride in Christ Jesus, and put no confidence in the flesh,
4 although I myself could boast as having confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he is confident in the flesh, I have more reason:

Carl Emerson said:
5 circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; "as to the Law", a Pharisee;

What was "the Law of the Pharisee", according to the Jesus "of the Bible"?

Is. 29: 13 Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: (Not God)

Matt. 15: 7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, 8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. 9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the "commandments of men". (Not God as you are promoting)

Mark 7: 8 For laying aside "the commandment of God", ye hold the "tradition of men" (Not God as you are trying to convince me), as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. 9 And he said unto them, Full well "ye reject the commandment of God", that ye may keep "your own tradition". (Not God's Laws)

Rom. 10: 1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. 2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish "their own righteousness", have "not submitted themselves" unto the righteousness "of God".

John 19: 7 The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by "our law" he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. What LAW of God condemned Jesus to death? Of course the answer that you full well know, is NONE. And yet you would try and convince men that the Pharisees, including Paul as a Pharisee, was "Blameless" in God's Laws.

Matt. 23: 2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: "for they say, and do not." 4 For they (Not God as you promote) bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

So by Paul and Jesus' Own words, the Pharisees had their own LAW. They "claimed" is was the Law of Moses, but the Jesus "of the Bible" who you call Lord, Lord, clearly told you it was not. They "Claimed" to trust Moses. But Jesus exposed that they did not;

John 5: 45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. 46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

John 7: 19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me?

I could go on and on in the Law and Prophets which expose the insidious LIE that the Jewish rulers of the City of David, and the Temple of Solomon were promoting God's Laws.

Carl Emerson said:
6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church;(of God) as to the righteousness which is in the Law, (Of the Pharisees, not God) found blameless.

The most insidious and evil falsehood ever perpetrated by this world's religions, if the blatant and evil lie that the Pharisees were living by, striving to live by, or promoted to others, God's Laws.

But just like the evil and wicked teaching that Jesus "Refused to Comply with His Father's Laws" where the adulterous woman was concerned, it doesn't matter to the men who promote such wickedness, what the Scriptures actually say. I can show God's Words over and over again to the promoters of this world's religious system, that the Pharisees LAW and God's Law were two completely different Laws, but it won't matter to them.

Nevertheless, it is my hope that you might be different than those Jesus specifically warned about, and that you might actually be interested in what the scriptures actually teach.

That is still my hope.

essentialsaltes · Nov 4, 2025

Economy top of mind for voters across races, preliminary ABC News exit polls show

We'll see what the voters think of the economy.

Tom D · Nov 4, 2025

I'm a loyal friend, never abandoned my friends, never forget my friends, its only they became colder & colder.
Due to various reasons, incl. getting too rich.

FreeinChrist · Nov 4, 2025

Always in His Presence said:
I am debunking.

Compare sources - Mine - the State Department, Rueters etc - yours - well.... left wing media at best.

Here is the Actual wording of the Peace Agreement

Technical Difficulties

Lol But you really aren't.
AP is not left wing. The State Department is is led by a Trump loyalist and I take anything the Trump administration says with more than a grain of salt. The other sources back their stuff up.

The Congo has not signed the economic part of the agreement yet

https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/congo-rwanda-will-not-sign-economic-deal-this-week-setback-peace-process-2025-10-03/

WASHINGTON/DAKAR/PARIS, Oct 3 (Reuters) - Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda will not sign an economic framework this week as expected, four sources familiar with the matter told Reuters on Friday, in another stumbling block for the Trump administration's efforts to implement a peace deal and spur Western investment in the region.

President Donald Trump is pursuing an ambitious bid to broker peace and draw billions of dollars of Western investment to a region rich in tantalum, gold, cobalt, copper, lithium and other minerals after Rwanda-backed M23 rebels seized two major cities in eastern Congo in January and February, posing the biggest threat to the government in Kinshasa in two decades.

Carl Emerson · Nov 4, 2025

SabbathBlessings said:
Why would only worshipping God be considered work? If that's work for someone perhaps they need to re-evaluate ones priorities. The Holy Spirit is Who wrote the Law, why would He be against His own laws, He is the One who enables us to keep His commandments through our love and cooperation John 14:15-18

And if you are only singling out the Sabbath as work, God asks us not to work but to rest from our works and labors on His holy Sabbath day.

Yes I agree - every day should be a Sabbath...

No more striving for Salvation, just being enormously thankful to be lavished with undeserved Love.

durangodawood · Nov 4, 2025

ThatRobGuy said:
Off the top of your head, can you name many socialist/communist revolutions that didn't involve violence or significant coercion under the threat of violence?
In terms of symbolism, a lot more people died under the hammer & sickle flag than any other flag.

Dunno...they wear masks (aka Black Bloc) as to conceal their identities when they're out making trouble so that they don't face consequences.

I'm assuming at least a few of them involved in those events are part of their school newspapers.

Its all super vague. Some random pictures of people we dont know in circumstances not available for examination, and responses to those people from "the left" that you conjure from your imagination.

Its too much. More specific reality and less supposition and assumptions please.

PloverWing · Nov 4, 2025

Delvianna said:
The California Healthy Youth Act (CHYA) - EC Sections 51930 - 51939 (Required for 7-12, optional for K-6)
EC Section 51932(b) states: "The opt-out provisions of this chapter shall not apply to instruction or materials that discuss gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, discrimination, bullying, relationships, or family whenever the content is a part of a course subject other than comprehensive sexual health education."

This means that a parent cannot legally opt their child out of:

A Social Studies lesson discussing the history of the LGBTQ+ rights movement (per the FAIR Education Act).

A Literature lesson that includes a book with a main character who is transgender or has same-sex parents.

An Anti-bullying or Diversity lesson that discusses gender identity.

Seems okay. A family can believe that it's morally wrong to be gay or trans, but still allow their children to know that LGBTQ people exist, that sometimes LGBTQ people have been mistreated in the past, and that it's good to be kind to LGBTQ people, just as one should be kind to people in general. I think that combination of beliefs is within the California policy that you've cited here.

essentialsaltes · Nov 4, 2025

How it started

How it's going.

essentialsaltes · Nov 4, 2025

Ben Shapiro Devotes Entire Show to Scorching Takedown of ‘Coward’ Tucker Carlson and ‘Twisted’ Nick Fuentes

“Hey folks, I want to do something different on today’s show. We’re going to cover one topic in depth. That topic is, I think, the most important thing happening in the country. It was a hot topic last week, but I wanted to take some time to really gather my thoughts and speak on it in coherent fashion, wholistic fashion. That topic is the fragmentation of the political right,” began Shapiro. “That fragmentation is being caused purposefully by a splinter faction of people led by a young man named Nick Fuentes. They call themselves the Groypers. They are white supremacists. They hate women, Jews, Hindus, many types of Christians, brown people of a wide variety of backgrounds, Blacks, America’s foreign policy, and America’s constitution. They admire Hitler and Stalin. And that splinter faction is now being facilitated and normalized within the mainstream Republican Party. The main agent in that normalization is Tucker Carlson, who is an intellectual coward, a dishonest interlocutor, and a terrible friend. And Tucker Carlson last week was aided, abetted, celebrated for normalizing Nazism within the Republican Party by the mainstay organization of the traditional right, the Heritage Foundation.”

hldude · Nov 4, 2025

YouTube Channel Video Devo
Login to view embedded media
“He Wants Unlimited Access”
Acts 1:8 NIV
But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.

In this day and age, we have so many different subscription plans offering us unlimited access. When we sign up for a membership, I think most often we are looking for the most perks we can get for our money. Most phone plans nowadays all include unlimited talk, text and data. I remember back when you had to pay extra for going over certain amount of calling minutes, texts and data caps. That’s becoming a thing of the past.

So much of what we pay for these days usually provides unlimited access. We like paying a price and getting unlimited access to the plan we’ve paid for. We don’t want any hindrances to what we can do. We don’t want to be restricted. And, if there’s ever an issue, we are sure to contact customer service to get things straightened because we are a paying customer.

At church Sunday, this passage was used and talked about how Jesus charged His men to take His message to everywhere in the world. He wasn’t just sending them through their town, but to other countries and all over the world. He didn’t want them limiting themselves. He wants full and complete access to their lives and to send them wherever he needed them to go.

God wants unlimited access to our lives. His desire is to send us wherever He leads. However, so often, we limit Him and give excuses because we don’t feel like doing what He wants us to do or going where He wants us to go. We always seem to have an excuse to not go certain places where He leads. We get selfish and don’t want to leave our comfort zones. But it doesn’t work that way if we are committed to the Great Commission. Jesus told His men and tells us to go and make disciples of ALL nations. There’s very inclusive!

Jesus asks us to give Him all access to our lives so that He can send us wherever He chooses. Are we giving Him all access and saying to Him first, “Yes! Lord the answer is Yes! Now, where do You want me to go”?

He wants all access of our lives. He wants to send us wherever He desires for us to go. Are we willing, ready and available?

essentialsaltes · Nov 4, 2025

wing2000 said:
.....accredited by whom?

I should have written credentialed. She has (allegedly) signed the restrictive Pentagon rules for journalists to obtain access to the Pentagon, joining the likes of the Gateway Pundit and LindellTV, while most journalists have turned up their noses at the restrictions on press freedom.

I'm assuming she's an 'independent journalist' rather than part of any particular 'news' outfit.

jacks · Nov 4, 2025

For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 3:11

I believe he is speaking to new Christians, because the chapter starts with:

Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans?

1 Corinthians 3:1-3

Though I think it can apply to all Christians.

wing2000 · Nov 4, 2025

FreeinChrist said:
“We have no inflation.” Inflation is at 3%.

Repeat after me, "we have no inflation"

Carl Emerson · Nov 4, 2025

SabbathBlessings said:
Strange it wasn't posted but the very next verse gives us the context of who was at fault and why....

8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 9 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord

The covenant was not the issue, why He wrote the exact words of the covenant Psa89:34 Exo34:28 2Cor3:3 just established His New Covenant on better promises Heb8:6 (if we cooperate with Him) on what He will do, if we allow Him to Heb8:10 John14:15-18

I think it is dangerous to ignore the plain reading when considering the greater context.

In this case you have denied the plain reading by making it into an 'either or' - when saying it is a 'both and' does not deny the text.

essentialsaltes · Nov 4, 2025

ralliann said:
The first amendment indeed applies to all people.

No it applies to the government. The government cannot punish speech it doesn't like. Such as firing an employee for non-work-related speech.

Maria Billingsley · Nov 4, 2025

essentialsaltes said:
She helped get her violent husband deported. Then ICE deported her — straight into his arms.
Carmen’s [not her real name] abusive husband came home drunk one night last summer. He pounded and kicked the door. He threatened to kill her as her young son watched in horror. She called police, eventually obtaining a restraining order. Months later he returned and beat her again. Police came again and he was eventually deported.

Thinking she finally escaped his cruelty, Carmen applied for what is known as a U-Visa. The visa provides crime victims a way to stay in the United States legally, but the Trump administration has routinely ignored pending applications.

During a regular immigration check-in in June, Carmen was detained. Two months later, she was put on a plane with her 8-year-old son, who just completed second grade. She was headed to her home country, terrified her husband would find her.

She emerged from the plane to her nightmare.

“I saw a man standing across from us and my heart sank,” she said. “It was my husband.”

“My husband told me it was such a coincidence that he was there when we arrived,” she said. “I knew he was lying. He had found that we were being deported and he was there to take us.

“I had no choice, I had nowhere else to go and there was no one speaking up for me.”

Now she says she is even more trapped than before.

He took her passports, so she can’t travel.

Lawyers for Carmen along with several immigrant victims of human trafficking, domestic violence and other crimes last month sued the Trump administration in the Central District of California for detaining and deporting survivors with pending visa applications, some of whom have been granted status to stay and sometimes work.

The administration’s actions affect nearly half a million immigrants who are awaiting a decision on a pending application for survivor-based protections, the most common of which is the U-Visa. Because Congress capped the number of visas that can be issued annually at 10,000, it can take a person 20 years to have their application processed.

The lawsuit argues the administration violated procedural rules in referencing the executive order “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” as the main justification for the policy.

Gotta hit those quotas somehow.

Ya. It was never about protecting the innocent. Sadly.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Vatican nixes use of ‘Co-Redemptrix’ as title for Mary​

Economy top of mind for voters across races, preliminary ABC News exit polls show​

Ben Shapiro Devotes Entire Show to Scorching Takedown of ‘Coward’ Tucker Carlson and ‘Twisted’ Nick Fuentes​

She helped get her violent husband deported. Then ICE deported her — straight into his arms.​

Filter

Forum statistics

Share this page

Vatican nixes use of ‘Co-Redemptrix’ as title for Mary

Economy top of mind for voters across races, preliminary ABC News exit polls show

Ben Shapiro Devotes Entire Show to Scorching Takedown of ‘Coward’ Tucker Carlson and ‘Twisted’ Nick Fuentes

She helped get her violent husband deported. Then ICE deported her — straight into his arms.