U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-02-2011, 11:26 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,079,568 times
Reputation: 3717

Advertisements

I recently heard that AZ has introduced a possible governor's mandate that babies born in AZ of illegal parents will not automatically garner US citizenship. Of course, that rule was never intended to accommodate the children of admitted illegally-present felons, nor should it have gained it's current popular status. It semingly did so by ignoring the sitution for so long it's become OK by simple social acceptance. Until now.

Does this one have even a snowflake's chance in hell? I fervently hope it does, since it would establish an ominous precedent that would possibly spread to... O.............M.............G!!!!!!! ....California.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-02-2011, 01:19 PM
 
Location: So. of Rosarito, Baja, Mexico
6,572 posts, read 17,991,938 times
Reputation: 5929
Little off the subject matter here.

Watched a movie last night where a man grew up in a Muslim household in England and when cleaning/moving out the parents things found a paper that showed he was adopted and Jewish.

He grew up attending the Mosque and then finds out he is in reality a Jew.

Now we have illegal Mexican citizens having babies in the US that are claimed to be US citizens and NOT Mexican Citizens.

In comparing the movie and the situation with the Illegals I would imagine that the child would follow the parents religion and Citizenship via birth as was with the man being born of Jewish parents was still a Jew even tho growing up in a Mosque setting.

No flames intended here just a curiosity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,079,568 times
Reputation: 3717
This raises another question I'd not thought of: do Mexican illegals here also claim their Mexican citizenry if they suddenly need it in order to regain entry into Mexico? The US does not recognize such dualities. (I know; while Canada says I'll always be a Canuck since I was born there, and haven't formally requested that I give up my citizenship, I'm still, and always will be, a Canadian citizen. Hey; it just might be useful, huh?).

So, are they willing to happily renounce their Mexican background if we let them stay? I'm thinking not. Better to claim and keep all the goodies one can, eh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Bike to Surf!
3,080 posts, read 9,703,957 times
Reputation: 2977
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
I recently heard that AZ has introduced a possible governor's mandate that babies born in AZ of illegal parents will not automatically garner US citizenship.
I think that's correct. However, it's clearly just political pandering to as states do not have the right to determine US citizenship. That's clearly a federal issue. Any such legislation would be basically trampling on the constitution and immediately struck down by the courts.

Quote:
Of course, that rule was never intended to accommodate the children of admitted illegally-present felons, nor should it have gained it's current popular status.
Birthright citizenship is a way of simplifying immigration issues. Since a child has no choice as to where or to whom it's born, it is an admirable egalitarian principle that a child born on US soil is granted US citizenship.

Some countries determine citizenship by the citizenship of the father, some by that of the mother, and some by a complicated mix of the two.

I'm not sure what you mean by felon, since entering the United States without inspection is not a felony, are you talking only about illegal aliens who have committed crimes?

Finally, what do you mean by "current popular status"? Birthright citizenship has always enjoyed widespread support except by fringe elements of the population such as so-called "nativists" and white-supremacy groups.

So it's more accurate to call the questioning of birthright citizenship a recent fad amongst some conservative media. Since there are much more pressing constitutional issues, and it is only a handful of radical revisionists who support re-writing this particular constitutional amendment, I don't see it changing anytime soon.

Quote:
It semingly did so by ignoring the sitution for so long it's become OK by simple social acceptance. Until now.
Well, it's still accepted by the vast majority of US citizens.

Quote:
Does this one have even a snowflake's chance in hell? I fervently hope it does, since it would establish an ominous precedent that would possibly spread to... O.............M.............G!!!!!!! ....California.
No. No chance in Arizona or elsewhere. Even if you re-wrote the constitution, I doubt California would adhere to the revised amendment.

I do expect a handful of Republican congressmen to try to galvanize their far-right supporters and up their campaign contributions by blowing hot air about it, but any reasonable person will tell you that any change is unlikely.

A better--and more realistic--focus of time and energy would be on a comprehensive immigration bill which cuts down on the flow of illegal immigrants by sealing the border and introducing a way for unskilled laborers to immigrate to the United States to fill the necessary agricultural positions while at the same time controlling, documenting, and taxing this source of workers.

But dealing with complex real-world issues like a responsible adult is a lot harder to do than making fairy-tale proclamations about how we're going to solve illegal immigration by re-writing the US constitution. I fear that acting like mature grown-ups is beyond the capabilities of a significant number of our politicians and citizens.

Let's see if any of the responses to this post prove me wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 03:19 PM
 
2,060 posts, read 4,918,929 times
Reputation: 1652
Ah yes anchor babies. Anyone who knows anything about legal immigration knows there's no such thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 04:31 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,163,231 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by sponger42 View Post
I think that's correct. However, it's clearly just political pandering to as states do not have the right to determine US citizenship. That's clearly a federal issue. Any such legislation would be basically trampling on the constitution and immediately struck down by the courts.



Birthright citizenship is a way of simplifying immigration issues. Since a child has no choice as to where or to whom it's born, it is an admirable egalitarian principle that a child born on US soil is granted US citizenship.

Some countries determine citizenship by the citizenship of the father, some by that of the mother, and some by a complicated mix of the two.

I'm not sure what you mean by felon, since entering the United States without inspection is not a felony, are you talking only about illegal aliens who have committed crimes?

Finally, what do you mean by "current popular status"? Birthright citizenship has always enjoyed widespread support except by fringe elements of the population such as so-called "nativists" and white-supremacy groups.

So it's more accurate to call the questioning of birthright citizenship a recent fad amongst some conservative media. Since there are much more pressing constitutional issues, and it is only a handful of radical revisionists who support re-writing this particular constitutional amendment, I don't see it changing anytime soon.



Well, it's still accepted by the vast majority of US citizens.



No. No chance in Arizona or elsewhere. Even if you re-wrote the constitution, I doubt California would adhere to the revised amendment.

I do expect a handful of Republican congressmen to try to galvanize their far-right supporters and up their campaign contributions by blowing hot air about it, but any reasonable person will tell you that any change is unlikely.

A better--and more realistic--focus of time and energy would be on a comprehensive immigration bill which cuts down on the flow of illegal immigrants by sealing the border and introducing a way for unskilled laborers to immigrate to the United States to fill the necessary agricultural positions while at the same time controlling, documenting, and taxing this source of workers.

But dealing with complex real-world issues like a responsible adult is a lot harder to do than making fairy-tale proclamations about how we're going to solve illegal immigration by re-writing the US constitution. I fear that acting like mature grown-ups is beyond the capabilities of a significant number of our politicians and citizens.

Let's see if any of the responses to this post prove me wrong.
We already have many visa programs in play. As for agricultural jobs there are unlimited H-2A visas for such work so there is no reason to hire illegal aliens for those jobs. Most illegals aren't picking crops anyway.

We already take in 1.5 million legal immigrants per year BASED ON OUR NEEDS. The problem is that there are more immigrants that want to come here than we can accomodate in jobs and resources. Now should our quotas reflect OUR needs or THEIRS? I think the answer is clear.

Whether you want to admit it or not birthright citizenship is a huge magnet for illegal aliens to come here because they know they can live off the welfare of their citizen children. Most countries require that at least one parent be a citizen or legal resident in order for their newborn to qualify for instant citizenship. That just makes sense. Why in the world should we continue to reward illegal alien adults with citizenship for their children born here just because they were able to violate our immigration laws?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 04:36 PM
 
3,493 posts, read 2,388,862 times
Reputation: 2345
Quote:
Originally Posted by sponger42 View Post
I think that's correct. However, it's clearly just political pandering to as states do not have the right to determine US citizenship. That's clearly a federal issue. Any such legislation would be basically trampling on the constitution and immediately struck down by the courts.
The constitution never meant to provide benefits for illegal migrants.

Quote:
Birthright citizenship is a way of simplifying immigration issues. Since a child has no choice as to where or to whom it's born, it is an admirable egalitarian principle that a child born on US soil is granted US citizenship.
Birthright citizenship was never meant to provide a means for illegal migrants to come here and claim benefits. Many nations do not grant someone citizenship unless at least one parent is a citizen. Our country should follow. We owe nothing to people who are here in violation of our immigration laws. Their children should derive citizenship from the nationality of their parents not from their parent's unlawful actions.

Quote:
Some countries determine citizenship by the citizenship of the father, some by that of the mother, and some by a complicated mix of the two.

I'm not sure what you mean by felon, since entering the United States without inspection is not a felony, are you talking only about illegal aliens who have committed crimes?
Coming the United States without permission is a criminal act. Most illegal migrants commit multiple crimes. They violate laws governing employment, laws governing the right to drive and laws mandating tax payment. An illegal alien is inherently a criminal. He should be treated as such.

Quote:
Finally, what do you mean by "current popular status"? Birthright citizenship has always enjoyed widespread support except by fringe elements of the population such as so-called "nativists" and white-supremacy groups.
Most Americans do not support allowing illegal migrants to come to the United States without permission. Most Americans do not support paying the birthing costs for an illegal migrant's baby nor do they support giving the illegal alien permission to collect welfare benefits from the United States taxpayer merely because they have given birth.

You are mistaken if you believe otherwise. Supporting rational immigration laws that do not reward illegal behavior does not make one a racist.

Quote:
So it's more accurate to call the questioning of birthright citizenship a recent fad amongst some conservative media. Since there are much more pressing constitutional issues, and it is only a handful of radical revisionists who support re-writing this particular constitutional amendment, I don't see it changing anytime soon.
Again most Americans do not support giving the offspring of illegal migrants benefits. Said anchor babies impose tremendous costs on American taxpayers. This is not a liberal vs. conservative issue. This is an issue that deserves to be confronted. Illegal migrants should not get unilateral permission to have a baby and force Americans to give them money as a result.


Quote:
Well, it's still accepted by the vast majority of US citizens.

No. No chance in Arizona or elsewhere. Even if you re-wrote the constitution, I doubt California would adhere to the revised amendment.

I do expect a handful of Republican congressmen to try to galvanize their far-right supporters and up their campaign contributions by blowing hot air about it, but any reasonable person will tell you that any change is unlikely.
Again this is not a left right issue. This is an issue that transcends both parties.

Quote:
A better--and more realistic--focus of time and energy would be on a comprehensive immigration bill which cuts down on the flow of illegal immigrants by sealing the border and introducing a way for unskilled laborers to immigrate to the United States to fill the necessary agricultural positions while at the same time controlling, documenting, and taxing this source of workers.
Americans have utterly no need whatsoever for unskilled laborers. They contribute absolutely nothing at all our society. Legalizing them will not lead to them paying taxes as most make far too little to pay anything at all into the federal coffers. We have enough high school drop outs as it is. The purpose of our laws is not to provide for the needs of people so foolish as to breed children they cannot support and will not educate.

Any comprehensive immigration reform should include a crackdown on anchor babies, a firm message to Mexico and other Latino countries that Americans are not going to learn Spanish or welcome their low skilled junior high school drop outs and the ending of all welfare benefits including the right to attend our schools just because you walked across the borders without permission.

Quote:
But dealing with complex real-world issues like a responsible adult is a lot harder to do than making fairy-tale proclamations about how we're going to solve illegal immigration by re-writing the US constitution. I fear that acting like mature grown-ups is beyond the capabilities of a significant number of our politicians and citizens.

Let's see if any of the responses to this post prove me wrong.
Yes. I agree. Confronting the costs that illegal migrants impose on Americans is an adult choice. Better to simply pat oneself on the back, declare oneself a non-racist and argue that Americans should be responsible for the needs of poor people with too many children everywhere. If the evil overconsuming middle class gets hurt in the process well even better.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,611 posts, read 10,965,652 times
Reputation: 3083
Speaking of "anchor babies in Az" - here's a shining example of one and the oft touted loyalty and allegience and love they have for this country............not

You only have to read through the "articles" this little sweetheart posts........


Obama will push DREAM Act again this spring - Phoenix civil rights | Examiner.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,563 posts, read 15,800,640 times
Reputation: 6259
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
This raises another question I'd not thought of: do Mexican illegals here also claim their Mexican citizenry if they suddenly need it in order to regain entry into Mexico? The US does not recognize such dualities. (I know; while Canada says I'll always be a Canuck since I was born there, and haven't formally requested that I give up my citizenship, I'm still, and always will be, a Canadian citizen. Hey; it just might be useful, huh?).

So, are they willing to happily renounce their Mexican background if we let them stay? I'm thinking not. Better to claim and keep all the goodies one can, eh?
America does not encourage dual citizenship but SCOTUS has ruled it is constitutional because your citizenship can't be taken away without your consent.

Mexico actually had strict laws against dual citizenship until a few years ago. If a Mexican national had obtained another citizenship they automatically lost Mexican nationality.

They changed because many Mexican Americans wanted to buy homes, send their kids to school there etc. and you can only do that if you're a Mexican citizen in most cases(ironic no?)

Basically they were losing out on some serious investment dollars and needed to capture it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-02-2011, 09:28 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,563 posts, read 15,800,640 times
Reputation: 6259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie View Post
Speaking of "anchor babies in Az" - here's a shining example of one and the oft touted loyalty and allegience and love they have for this country............not

You only have to read through the "articles" this little sweetheart posts........


Obama will push DREAM Act again this spring - Phoenix civil rights | Examiner.com

This is the guy that warned of revolution as a result of the Dream Act failing. He and Obama are delusional. The GOP is more afraid of their base than the scraps Hispanics may throw their way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top