I didn't. All I said is that they are criminals as they broke our laws ... you said they weren't. And I added that we as a nation have every right to create and enforce those laws. Morally superior, I don't see how you get that.
I'm not making anyone suffer. Their own governments are. In most cases, we, as a nation send generous foreign aid packages to those countries in an attempt to ease their suffering. I have no quarrel with that ... but I do have a problem with the citizens of those countries deciding on their own that they have some special right to come here without following established law.
All I said is that they are criminals as they broke our laws ... you said they weren't.
I never said they weren't technically "criminals".
Morally superior, I don't see how you get that.
I'm not sure what you mean by this brief sentence.
I'm not making anyone suffer.
Well, I assume you're not doing it personally, but the US is. Separating them from their children after they're caught is making them suffer. You know, the law also decides that death is an appropriate punishment for 'criminals', perhaps you'd prefer that a swift execution be the lawful crime punishment for border crossers?
Law and morality or decency are not the same thing. I'm not saying that the US shouldn't make these people suffer horribly in the pursuit of its own selfish interests. The US does that often.
I'm saying that seeking a better life for your children isn't doing anything wrong in my eyes. These people might technically be criminals under US law, but that label is inappropriate in my eyes as it lumps them together with rapists, as you did in your first comment.
The fact that you so willingly call them criminals without qualification implies to me that you think they're bad people. I do not think they're bad people just because they crossed a border without permission.
I'm pretty sure I covered all that:
I think you know this sentence was the main point of my comment: