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.
Immigrants who have been naturalized do indeed vote. Do you have any data that would suggest that they, as a group, would like to see birthright citizenship prohibited?
They wouldn't necessarily care any more about than other citizens. Their own children would not be affected by the change.
Quote:
And, do you have any data that birthright citizenship is a burning issue
for the electorate as a whole?
I don't know if it's burning, but it is opposed by the majority.
"The poll also found 54 percent of Americans oppose “birthright citizenship” when children born to illegal immigrants automatically become United States citizens, which is now the case. Thirty-eight percent favor the current policy of automatic citizenship for these children. “Opposition has ranged from 51% to 65% in surveys since April 2006. Support has been in the 28% to 41% range in that same period,” Rasmussen reports." New Poll: Americans Support More Aggressive Stand On Illegal Immigration
Birthright citizenship is a constitutional amendment. Changing that are near impossible. Not to mention that we need more young people as the birth rate is otherwise low.
The main reason the birthrate is so low is that responsible Americans don't have a bunch of kids that they can't support properly. Too bad they're stuck supporting so many from irresponsible parents.
Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco to Chinese parents around 1871, had been denied re-entry to the United States after a trip abroad, under a law restricting Chinese immigration and prohibiting immigrants from China from becoming naturalized U.S. citizens. He challenged the government's refusal to recognize his citizenship, and the Supreme Court ruled in his favor, holding that the citizenship language in the Fourteenth Amendment encompassed essentially everyone born in the U.S.—even the U.S.-born children of foreigners—and could not be limited in its effect by an act of Congress.
ah...born to foreigners who are here (traveling) LEGALLY.....
his parents (originally from china, had come here LEGALLY..and he was born here to LEGAL people.....this is where liberals get confused...liberals cant seem to understand that word ILLEGAL
on the otherhand...someone BREAKING THE LAW being here ILLEGALLY, either by illegally entering, or staying past their visa (in otherwords saying F.U. to the law) and have a child... that child should NOT be rewarded with citizenship, because of the ILLEGAL ACTION of their parents...... is it the kids fault...no....but it certainly is not something they should be rewarded with....they are citizens of whatever country their ILLEGAL parents are from (and btw...not all illegals are from mexico/central America/south America.... there are illegals here from all over the world....
ah...born to foreigners who are here (traveling) LEGALLY.....
That isn't what happened but feel free to spin it that way, the courts won't. They lived here but left for awhile. Congress changed the laws to try and keep some people out but the SCOTUS said, nope, he was born here he is a citizen.
You can claim they lived here legally but the 14th made no such restrictions. Congress can make laws concerning who they will allow in to the country but they can't as this case shows create laws that run counter to the Constitution. At this time, you just jumped on a boat and came to the country.
There wasn't such a thing as an "illegal" when the 14th was written. You can't claim that the 14th covers things that were never in existence at the time. If they wanted to later exclude those who just came here they needed to amend the 14th. It has never happened.
That's not even an argument about how it should be. It's an argument concerning how it is.
Quote:
his parents (originally from china, had come here LEGALLY..and he was born here to LEGAL people.....this is where liberals get confused...liberals cant seem to understand that word ILLEGAL
What makes me a liberal? My support for the Constitution including the 1st, 2nd and 14th? My desire to see the budget balanced? Being against amnesty? Believing Obama is nothing more than a petulant child?
Quote:
on the otherhand...someone BREAKING THE LAW being here ILLEGALLY, either by illegally entering, or staying past their visa (in otherwords saying F.U. to the law) and have a child... that child should NOT be rewarded with citizenship, because of the ILLEGAL ACTION of their parents...... is it the kids fault...no....but it certainly is not something they should be rewarded with....they are citizens of whatever country their ILLEGAL parents are from (and btw...not all illegals are from mexico/central America/south America.... there are illegals here from all over the world....
One can argue they shouldn't if you want. You can even try and change the Constitution. I don't think you are going to be able to. It's no different than those who think the 2nd doesn't grant rights to individuals.
Also, accept the fact that "anchor babies" are just as American as you and me
But, they shouldn't be considered American at all. Mom gets free prenatal care even though she is illegal because the idea is that a healthy baby won't cost as much for the US citizens in the long run. So, illegal mom is in the hospital hatching another anchor for "cash" while flying the flag of Mexico in their yard. Note: at the end of my post, the first referenced article kind of says they aren't as American as, well, me since I'm not sure about you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sommie789
Well until employers start paying a descent wages then people will start having babies.
See, this is the thing. The illegals are getting their prenatal and delivery charges paid by taxpayers, some "loophole" in the Medicaid system (my disabled son is getting cuts in his services to help pay for this). They don't have to worry about the expense of having the babies and then, we, US taxpayers, pay to raise the child. We pay to educate the child which costs considerably more than our own children.
I know most couples now have only 1 or 2 kids and many would like more. I am guessing that if we, the American taxpayers, offered to provide free prenatal and delivery along with health care for the child for its life plus other welfare benefits, a lot of people, good and caring citizens would have children too although many Americans still have enough pride not to take handouts but this isn't necessarily the same with the illegals who came here for the freebies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed
So, what do you want to do? Strip away citizenship from anchor babies? Can't do that unless they are a terrorist, and a terrorist that is a dual citizen only
We just deport the illegals parents. Of course, with the number of children coming into the US alone, I am not sure the children mean enough to them that they would take their babies back with them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Costaexpress
Not to mention that this has been going on at the low skill level for a long time. And these people never minded until they perceive foreigners as a threat at their level, then suddenly it is all wrong. They want to shut our doors, build a wall, you name it. We are a nation built by immigrants, always have, always will be.
We have wanted to build a wall for some time and it has been a long time since people haven't had an issue with illegals if ever, the majority, not the ones making money off of them. Now that so many jobs have become mechanized and require at least a basic education, there isn't a need for the illegal labor. Now, the anchor babies are more and more to bring in the welfare dollars. The schools are overburdened with English As A Second Language and it was that way for some time. Every time "amnesty" is mentioned in the news thousands more pour in for their piece of our tax dollars. We can no longer bear the burden.
This is a really interesting article that if you continue to the bottom says that an anchor baby doesn't get to stay in the US automatically and can be deported with their illegal parents. At 18, that anchor baby can return. I didn't know this but it is interesting and obviously a well kept secret.
Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco to Chinese parents around 1871, had been denied re-entry to the United States after a trip abroad, under a law restricting Chinese immigration and prohibiting immigrants from China from becoming naturalized U.S. citizens. He challenged the government's refusal to recognize his citizenship, and the Supreme Court ruled in his favor, holding that the citizenship language in the Fourteenth Amendment encompassed essentially everyone born in the U.S.—even the U.S.-born children of foreigners—and could not be limited in its effect by an act of Congress.
That wasn't a case about illegal alien parents. It was about legal immigrant parents.
I have no idea why one has to cover something over and over. It makes no difference. The 14th makes no distinction. Later laws do not negate the 14th protections as this case shows.
If Congress wanted to exclude the children of illegals when they changed the laws they had to amend the 14th. They never did.
It doesn't..only tells yo the degree of hatred towards anyone who isn't deemed relevant as peoples..and that of course varies depending on who THEY are and who they represent...
Oh Grey..It was never an issue until hate rose up against those folk who take jobs away from them..Course None of Them would ever do those jobs as it's beneath them..
TOO bad so sad...It's how the system has always worked..best folks understand just how their own Nation was initially built and devolped ..Many just have no CLUE how their own Country actually became the nation it is as of today
This continued rhetoric will never fly in the near future..Anyone NOT originating from back like 200 years ago..are somehow deemed infiltrators..using their Country..Hatred on purely mis-informations..blaming all ills on illegals..blaming anyone NOT like themselves as "Taker's"..It hasn't stopped since 2009..I say..OP is correct..WHitehouse elected office is a dim possibility..and those in office obstructing any laws benefiting regular Americans while reap the rewards...While it doesn't affect me personally..It certainly affects my American friends who are forced to endure such BS.....
Wanting birthright citizenship ended for illegal aliens parents has nothing to do with our job situation. It is because it makes a mockery out of our citizenship and is one of the magnets that draws them here. They can tap into our welfare coffers thru them and we have enough of our own needy. It has nothing to do with hate so stop this nonsense! No one is blaming all of our ills on illegal aliens either but you have to be a complete idiot not to realize that they are a part of the problems in this country. And no, our country was not built by illegal immigration but legal immigration.
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.
