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)
 
Old 05-23-2010, 05:02 PM
 
7,541 posts, read 5,145,712 times
Reputation: 1831

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
The writers of that amendment never intended for them to be instant citizens. The Supreme Court should take another look at it and see where they have erred in their judgement.
Not supported by any history or claims by the writers.

The 14th Amendment was to guarantee citizenship to those born within our borders and those who go through the naturalization process.

Nothing more, nothing less.

It was born, however to allow blacks who were slaves to gain citizenship due to the North Winning the Civil War.

Because blacks were not considered citizens but property at the time, the writers of the amendment needed to legalize their status and making them citizens. Their children could be afforded citizenship at birth.

However, nothing prevented these slaves from returning back to their home country if they chose to do so.

So, by your definition, the slaves were using their children as "anchor" babies as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-23-2010, 05:28 PM
 
Location: San Diego
32,798 posts, read 30,034,103 times
Reputation: 17687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus View Post
OMG...idiot. Where did I state that Catholics didn't believe in God or Jesus Christ.

They have a different belief and understanding of God and Jesus Christ than that of the basic Christian belief

Holy damn, you show nothing but your gross misunderstanding of ALL topics you post about.
Nice personal attack, I guess you've lost that round.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Keonsha, Wisconsin
2,480 posts, read 2,794,599 times
Reputation: 573
OK all of you Europeans from Poland, Italy, Germany, Ireland, British, etc., etc., etc., I want to hear one big WHOOSH as you and your mother, father, grandfather and grandmother, great great grandfather and mothers exit the USA. All were nothing but anchor babies except the ones who came over on a boat, and those came here illegally too. The only ones who are here LEGALLY are AMERICAN NATIVES. Your ancestors stole the USA Land from them. Aren't you happy now? If YOUR ANCESTORS would never have come here in the first place, there wouldn't be any problems now. Your ancestors are the ones who caused all of these problems in the first place, I hope you're happy with yourselves. American Natives NEVER asked you to come here. Neither did Mexicanos who were living here in New Mexico and Texas before you.

I was sworn to
Quote:
unhold ?
the constitution of the United States?

I wasn't sworn to enfore ICE laws, that task rests with the CBP, and not individual states or the Military, again, that is Federal Jusidiction.

Go ahead, turn your backs on Hispanics and see what happens at the voting booths.

Thank goodness the framers of our Constitution were LIBERALS.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/14304626-post180.html

Last edited by Hombre57; 05-23-2010 at 05:41 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 05:37 PM
 
Location: TEXAS
378 posts, read 356,941 times
Reputation: 243
The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads in part:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside."

Babies born to illegal alien mothers within U.S. borders are called anchor babies because under the 1965 immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency.

The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves. In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by writing:

"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."

The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense.

Last edited by desli; 05-23-2010 at 06:26 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,894 posts, read 13,112,272 times
Reputation: 3947
Please... where exactly is that 1965 Immigration Act provision for "anchor babies?"

Exactly?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 06:09 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,894 posts, read 13,112,272 times
Reputation: 3947
Quote:
Originally Posted by desli View Post
This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.
Okay... this says only that children born to foreign diplomats are not included.

Who pretends they did not already know that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 06:45 PM
 
Location: TEXAS
378 posts, read 356,941 times
Reputation: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Please... where exactly is that 1965 Immigration Act provision for "anchor babies?"

Exactly?
If I understand it correctly, and I am not a constitutional scholar by any means, don't even pretend to be . . . the loophole is the term "subject to the jurisdiction thereof", do you agree?

Opponents argue that the native country has an allegiance on the anchors, and therefore, automatic US citizenship is not a granted right.

The greatest threat of the 1965 provision was that the anchors can sponsor other family members when they reach the age of 21.


Evidently, this has not been thoroughly and consistently challenged in the courts because of the greater want for votes and cheap labor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 06:58 PM
 
Location: central Oregon
1,856 posts, read 2,025,508 times
Reputation: 2377
Quote:
Originally Posted by desli View Post
"This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. "

The original intent of the 14th Amendment was clearly not to facilitate illegal aliens defying U.S. law at taxpayer expense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Okay... this says only that children born to foreign diplomats are not included.

Who pretends they did not already know that?
It reads:
"...will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners,..."
"... will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are aliens,..."
it also says:
"...will not, of course, include persons in the United States...who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers ..."

It actually says, "foreigners, illegals, and families of ambassadors or foreign ministers". It does NOT say that ONLY children born to the last two groups are not given automatic citizenship. It includes ALL the groups mentioned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 07:11 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,146,155 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hombre57 View Post
OK all of you Europeans from Poland, Italy, Germany, Ireland, British, etc., etc., etc., I want to hear one big WHOOSH as you and your mother, father, grandfather and grandmother, great great grandfather and mothers exit the USA. All were nothing but anchor babies except the ones who came over on a boat, and those came here illegally too. The only ones who are here LEGALLY are AMERICAN NATIVES. Your ancestors stole the USA Land from them. Aren't you happy now? If YOUR ANCESTORS would never have come here in the first place, there wouldn't be any problems now. Your ancestors are the ones who caused all of these problems in the first place, I hope you're happy with yourselves. American Natives NEVER asked you to come here. Neither did Mexicanos who were living here in New Mexico and Texas before you.

I was sworn to the constitution of the United States?

I wasn't sworn to enfore ICE laws, that task rests with the CBP, and not individual states or the Military, again, that is Federal Jusidiction.

Go ahead, turn your backs on Hispanics and see what happens at the voting booths.

Thank goodness the framers of our Constitution were LIBERALS.

http://www.city-data.com/forum/14304626-post180.html
Oh, boy another clueless one living in the past. You say you are sworn to honor the constitution of the U.S. and yet those very ones who framed it came here "illegally" according to you. Now that's funny.

I see, so to enforce our immigration laws is turning one's back on Hispanics? WTH? What does that say about Hispanic citizens that they will punish the politicians at the voting booth for not allowing entry into our country by their ILLEGAL ethnic group? Just who is their loyalty to? Doesn't appear it is to this country and its laws.

We already have treaties with those whose tribes were indigenous to the USA. The Mexican's tribal ancestors were not indigenous to this country and not only that but most of them have that white conquerors European blood coursing through their veins just like many other Americans. So they should talk! Mexican's country is Mexico, not the USA.

Last edited by chicagonut; 05-23-2010 at 07:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2010, 07:13 PM
 
166 posts, read 212,151 times
Reputation: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by DraggingCanoe View Post
Author of Arizona immigration law wants to end birthright citizenship - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20100521/pl_ynews/ynews_pl2192 - broken link)

"The author of Arizona's immigration law told constituents he wants to pass another measure to invalidate citizenship granted to the children of illegal aliens."

This man should run for President.
I wish we could draft him! I think we may be on a roll here.
Certainly the message is getting out that the majority of U.S. citizens are ready for illegals to leave.
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
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