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.
But a birth certificate of someone born in the United States is currently recognized as showing proof of citizenship and nationality (i.e. voter registration, passport application, Social Security application, driver's license issuance, or going through a Port of Entry of the United States prior to 1 June 2009)...
No it is not. A birth certificate merely shows that someone has indeed been born on US Soil (a birth certificate does not hold the status of parents nor of the child). There is no recognized proof of US citizenship unless one holds a US passport stating U.S. Citizen on it other wise they are recognized only as a U.S. National, the rest is merely assumed and has become a sort of defacto recognition of US citizenship when in fact all these documents show is that a person is residing within the sovereignty of the U.S. A birth certificate merely establishes an identity.
SS numbers only show that ones identity is on file with the federal government and is used merely to collect taxes based on wages earned.
The U.S. Department of State will not accept a "voter registration document" as proof of citizenship. The question of citizenship status on a voter id is taken at the word of the person applying for State purposes only. There is no verification of citizenship in order to obtain this card.
It is the Department of State that writes the rules regarding who is and is not granted citizenship by birth. Each time there is a change in the office or in the control of Government this rule changes from either ascriptive or consensualist. With the Democrats in charge of Government and a Progressive running the State Department the rules were re-written to the view of the ascriptive ideology. This will change when a consensualist takes the office or become the controlling factor of the government.
No it is not. A birth certificate merely shows that someone has indeed been born on US Soil (a birth certificate does not hold the status of parents nor of the child). There is no recognized proof of US citizenship unless one holds a US passport stating U.S. Citizen on it other wise they are recognized only as a U.S. National, the rest is merely assumed and has become a sort of defacto recognition of US citizenship when in fact all these documents show is that a person is residing within the sovereignty of the U.S. A birth certificate merely establishes an identity...
Then all of these states and agencies better stop applying a birth certificate as proof of citizenship. I have had both the brown (diplomatic) and blue-covered U.S. passport, but not aware of either with a verbatim identifier of the bearer being a U.S. citizen. As discussed before, a passport shows nationality, not citizenship (among U.S. Nationals, there are only a very small percentage that are not U.S. citizens).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns
...SS numbers only show that ones identity is on file with the federal government and is used merely to collect taxes based on wages earned...
But can also show how, when, and where that Social Security number was gained, and used for quite a bit more than you say...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns
...The question of citizenship status on a voter id is taken at the word of the person applying for State purposes only. There is no verification of citizenship in order to obtain this card...
Actually there is verification, and you even mentioned it. The same as how the Border Patrol determines my citizenship: I tell them (most of the time). The person attests to it when they register to vote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns
...It is the Department of State that writes the rules regarding who is and is not granted citizenship by birth. Each time there is a change in the office or in the control of Government this rule changes from either ascriptive or consensualist. With the Democrats in charge of Government and a Progressive running the State Department the rules were re-written to the view of the ascriptive ideology. This will change when a consensualist takes the office or become the controlling factor of the government.
So go talk to Hillary (and they said she wasn't going to be put in an important position?)...
Oh, along those lines, whom headed the Department of State when Obama was born in Hawaii (?) ?...
Last edited by IBMMuseum; 08-01-2011 at 04:20 PM..
I can’t believe you actually wrote this. Anchor babies do not give birth to themselves. Their illegal alien parents are the ones who give birth to remain in this country, not them. And, citizens do not have to exploit the 14th Amendment. After all, they are already citizens, likewise their children. This is nonsense to the umpth degree.
Illegals aren't exploiting the 14th amendment either. Giving birth doesn't give THEM citizenship, it gives THEIR CHILDREN citizenship. They are ALREADY CITIZENS. It IS nonsense, because all I did was elaborate on the "logic" of the post that I was replying to. The fact that the result is nonsense is PRECISELY THE POINT.
...There is no recognized proof of US citizenship unless one holds a US passport stating U.S. Citizen on it other wise they are recognized only as a U.S. National, the rest is merely assumed and has become a sort of defacto recognition of US citizenship when in fact all these documents show is that a person is residing within the sovereignty of the U.S. ...
My current U.S. passport has the following text in three languages (English, French, and Spanish) without saying specifically that I am a U.S. citizen:
¨The Secretary of State of the United States of America hereby requests all whom it may concern to permit the citizen/national of the United States named herein to pass without delay or hindrance and in case of need to give all lawful aid and protection¨
I don´t remember if my diplomatic passport specified citizenship...
Last edited by IBMMuseum; 08-01-2011 at 07:09 PM..
Then all of these states and agencies better stop applying a birth certificate as proof of citizenship. I have had both the brown (diplomatic) and blue-covered U.S. passport, but not aware of either with a verbatim identifier of the bearer being a U.S. citizen. As discussed before, a passport shows nationality, not citizenship (among U.S. Nationals, there are only a very small percentage that are not U.S. citizens).
I see you answered your own comment above in post 85. Every citizen is a national of the United States. Not every national is a citizen (some US Territories). As for Diplomats or Officials, the color of the covers are black and brown respectively while the Citizen/National is blue. INA's define who are US Nationals, and since there are relatively few US Nationals only (American Samoa and Swains Island, certain inhabitants of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands). As the Department has received few requests (US Nationals only), there is no justification for the creation of a non-citizen national certificate. Designing a separate document that includes anti-fraud mechanisms was seen as an inefficient expenditure of resources. Therefore, the Department determined that those who would be eligible to apply for such a certificate may apply for a United States passport that would delineate and certify their status as a national but not a citizen of the United States.
Quote:
But can also show how, when, and where that Social Security number was gained, and used for quite a bit more than you say...
I have no doubt.
Quote:
Actually there is verification, and you even mentioned it. The same as how the Border Patrol determines my citizenship: I tell them (most of the time). The person attests to it when they register to vote.
Attesting to is not verifying.
Quote:
So go talk to Hillary (and they said she wasn't going to be put in an important position?)...
Oh, along those lines, whom headed the Department of State when Obama was born in Hawaii (?) ?...
Why? As I stated, when a consenualist becomes in charge the State Department rules will change again. You've even agreed that it is going to take a SCOTUS ruling to verify BRC to illegal aliens once and for all.
What does Obama and Hawaii have to do with this? Are you in some way insinuating I am a birther? Obama's father was here legally and his mother was a citizen. I would be more interested in Gov Richardson since his father was only a US National and his mother was sent here to give birth and then returned to Mexico with Bill in tow.
Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 08-01-2011 at 09:08 PM..
A statement of citizenship, whether made to a Border Patrol agent or County Clerk, is a legally verified means to perform the check...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns
...I would be more interested in Gov Richardson since his father was only a US National and his mother was sent here to give birth and then returned to Mexico with Bill in tow.
Why do you think that Bill´s father was only a U.S. National?...
YES, WE CAN if I can quote a recent political rally endorsement. We're Americans; so YES, we CAN stop illegal aliens from hi-jacking the Fourteenth Amendment! This is our country, and it was those folks who now are our ancestors and of whom we are part of their posterity--you remember some of their names like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, Patrick Henry, Paul Revere, Edmund Randolph, John Hancock, Samuel Adams?--who established this great country of ours. Of course, we can stop the illegals from running rough-shod over us by exploiting our own law of the Fourteenth Amendment!
Don't be intimidated by illegal aliens who try to convince us native-born Americans, regardless of our color, gender, etc., that we owe them. We don't owe them anything. Everybody fought fair--in the Mexican-American War in the 1800s when Mexico lost their territory to the United States--so that now this is our country with our law of the Fourteenth Amendment. We won't be held hostage by illegals trying to hi-jack the 14th Amendment for their self-serving purpose.
...As the Department has received few requests [(US Nationals only)], there is no justification for the creation of a non-citizen national certificate. Designing a separate document that includes anti-fraud mechanisms was seen as an inefficient expenditure of resources. Therefore, the Department determined that those who would be eligible to apply for such a certificate may apply for a United States passport that would delineate and certify their status as a national but not a citizen of the United States...
Normally you should give credit if you quote a source word-for-word, otherwise someone could think it was your own words:
And of course you had clearly studied the issue at the time, with the next lesson how Davy Crockett killed a bear...
I think most of us know history. Of course the reconquista types have their own version of history. Perhaps the version you believe?
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.
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.
14th Amendment Abuse
