and your deflection as though your original point stands regardless of whether your children are taken away because you committed a terrible crime (felony) or faced a civil infraction (misdemeanor) suggests you agree that these asylum seekers -- who are allowed to cross the border illegally as long as they turn themselves in promptly -- should have their children ripped away from them as a matter of policy, not because they committed a serious crime that would deem them to be unfit parents who are a danger to their children.

you are, in effect, arguing that anyone's children should be taken away for any civil infraction, regardless of whether the child is actually being harmed. but yeah, ha ha, good joke, i guess....?