I think you are now confusing "Legal Deportation" with "De Facto Deportation."I am well aware they are not the same, it is your side that seems confused about this. "Deportation" is defined by the INS as
The formal removal of an alien from the United States when the alien has been found removable for violating the immigration laws.
None of the children involved were found to be aliens violating the immigration laws.
I've explained this above. You either believe the pro-life argument, or you don't. The Pro-Life argument is inconsistent with the Jus Soli argument. If you are pro-life, you must chose whether to give up being pro-life, or give up supporting Jus Soli. They are incompatible philosophies.
Sorry, but this is nonsense. Pro-life is a moral issue for me. Jus Soli is a legal concept well established in common law, and explicitly stated to apply in the US by the Supreme Court in Rogers v. Bellei. I can be 100% in favor of the moral, and still recognize the law of land. This is a false construct on your part to bring in unrelated issues.
Sorry, but this is nonsense. Pro-life is a moral issue for me. Jus Soli is a legal concept... And the "legal" consequences are the murder of innocent children, which makes it a MORAL issue. Slavery was a "legal" concept, the consequences of which are the use of other human beings as property, which made it a MORAL issue. As one insightful commenter put it:
"Roe v. Wade is cut from the same cloth as Dred Scott v. Sanford: Certain classes of people are property.
well established in common law, and explicitly stated to apply in the US by the Supreme Court in Rogers v. Bellei. I can be 100% in favor of the moral, and still recognize the law of land. This is a false construct on your part to bring in unrelated issues.
The boundary you seem to want to impose between them is the false construct. Just saw this yesterday. Sums it up imo.
So how about answering the question? Are you Pro-Life, or are you Pro-Abortion?