Political & Elections

BigG · Guru

RE: Birthright Citizenship Under Assault?

DonnaL · Senior Member

Ah, but I didn't say "never," did I? Abyss assumed that that 's what I meant. It isn't happening in my lifetime; I'm sure of that. And if it happens after I'm dead, he won't be able to prove to me that I was wrong, so it won't count, will it?

BigG · Guru

Be nice.

But abyss has a point, never say never.

However, I thought the ERA would pass easily.

Abyss · Senior Member

I may be an idiot to your brilliant mind, but at least I understand how the Constitutional amendment process works and how incredibly difficult it is to to effect an amendment that has any significant opposition at all. The "marriage" amendment has been "seriously discussed" by certain elements of society for years. Look how far it's gotten.You said a political event is *never* going to happen. Just like there would *never* be a black president. Hilarious.

I'd feel way more insulted if you'd ever done anything to prove your qualifications to offer an opinion on my intelligence or anyone else's.I'm sorry for not meeting the required burden of proof for 'qualifications', arbiter of all that is holy.

More humorously, you think I'm actually attacking your intellect. Merely window dressing.

-- Edited by Abyss on Wednesday 5th of January 2011 07:05:14 PM

-- Edited by Abyss on Wednesday 5th of January 2011 07:05:57 PM

DonnaL · Senior Member

I may be an idiot to your brilliant mind, but at least I understand how the Constitutional amendment process works and how incredibly difficult it is to to effect an amendment that has any significant opposition at all. The "marriage" amendment has been "seriously discussed" by certain elements of society for years. Look how far it's gotten.

I'd feel way more insulted if you'd ever done anything to prove your qualifications to offer an opinion on my intelligence or anyone else's. And I don't mean your dozens of posts on CC defending so-called "scientific" racism and talking about what a worthless culture Mexicans have.

Abyss · Senior Member

BigG wrote:

The real issue is JOBS!

If all the bubbas and leroys were up to their ears in forced overtime, they would be screaming for more of them latin fellers to take some of the load off.

Crude, but deny the truth of my assertion.

-- Edited by BigG on Wednesday 5th of January 2011 05:49:05 PM

Exactly. It's very hard to predict what will happen with a sustained period of 10%+ unemployment and a labor participation rate stuck at 1960's levels.

Anyone look at immigration statistics in the 1930s?

Abyss · Senior Member

DonnaL wrote:

Abyss/Mr. Payne, you're as obnoxious now as you were on CC.

I don't have to be psychic to predict the future on this issue.

The fact the elimination of birthright citizenship is even being discussed seriously indicates that's far closer to reality than most ivory tower idiots would like to admit.

BigG · Guru

The real issue is JOBS!

If all the bubbas and leroys were up to their ears in forced overtime, they would be screaming for more of them latin fellers to take some of the load off.

Crude, but deny the truth of my assertion.

-- Edited by BigG on Wednesday 5th of January 2011 05:49:05 PM

DonnaL · Senior Member

Abyss/Mr. Payne, you're as obnoxious now as you were on CC.

I don't have to be psychic to predict the future on this issue.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Repeated statements are repeated. Oy.

Abyss · Senior Member

romanigypsyeyes wrote:

^ Most of us can make an educated guess. If we couldn't, this board wouldn't really be necessary now would it?

A fountain of knowledge, again.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

^ Most of us can make an educated guess. If we couldn't, this board wouldn't really be necessary now would it?

Abyss · Senior Member

DonnaL wrote:

It's all a waste of time, money, and cyberspace. Arizona is passing a blatantly unconstitutional law, and elimination of that part of the 14th Amendment isn't going to happen.

You can predict the future? Impressive.

DonnaL · Senior Member

It's all a waste of time, money, and cyberspace. Arizona is passing a blatantly unconstitutional law, and elimination of that part of the 14th Amendment isn't going to happen.

Abyss · Senior Member

SamuraiLandshark wrote:

ICE is highly reluctant to split up families.

Even if mom isn't legal, it's highly unlikely she will be deported.

Deportation is not a goal of any government agency.

Abyss · Senior Member

Cardinal Fang wrote:

Do we know how many women a year sneak across the border when they're nine months pregnant, in order to give birth here? I suspect they are a very low percentage of all the women who give birth while here illegally. I don't see much benefit to the mother in having her baby here if she's not already here for other reasons.

I support birthright citizenship because I don't want to create a permanent underclass of second- and third-generation people born here who are not citizens. Other countries with guest worker programs have such underclasses, to their disbenefit. If you're born here, you're part of my country and I want you to be an American.

Like Switzerland. Such a ****ty country.

-- Edited by Abyss on Tuesday 4th of January 2011 09:18:29 PM

berurah · Senior Member

Oops, my bad. Y'all are right.

Mexican women say they do NOT come here to give birth. ;)

Princeton University demographer Douglas Massey said that in 30 years studying Mexican immigration, he’s never interviewed a migrant who said they came to the United States just to get citizenship for their children.

Read more: http://www.telegram.com/article/20100904/NEWS/9040349/1052/RSS01&source=rss#ixzz1A8JP8DzF

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

ICE is highly reluctant to split up families.

Even if mom isn't legal, it's highly unlikely she will be deported.

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

They call them anchor babies for a reason

What is that reason? A baby born here is a citizen, but if its mother was here illegally she is still here illegally after the birth. I don't see the benefit to her of having the baby here; she is still equally vulnerable to deportation should she be caught.

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Probably a lot fewer sneak over the border while 9 months pregnant. True.

Why risk the journey when you are in your third trimester? Why overstay your temporary visa (if you have one), when you should be getting your baby things together?

It's just as easy to come here and become an "illegal immigrant" while not pregnant. Then, get pregnant and then give birth to your anchor baby at any time.

It's not like we enforce the law and deport every illegal we see, so there are plenty of folks having those anchor babies at any time when it's convenient to them for their families.

They call them anchor babies for a reason, and whether women come over pregnant from day +1 after gestation to -1 day before delivery, their child becomes a citizen. Automatically.

Might as well send out invitations.

Cardinal Fang · Senior Member

Do we know how many women a year sneak across the border when they're nine months pregnant, in order to give birth here? I suspect they are a very low percentage of all the women who give birth while here illegally. I don't see much benefit to the mother in having her baby here if she's not already here for other reasons.

I support birthright citizenship because I don't want to create a permanent underclass of second- and third-generation people born here who are not citizens. Other countries with guest worker programs have such underclasses, to their disbenefit. If you're born here, you're part of my country and I want you to be an American.

berurah · Senior Member

Jordcin wrote:

But why would this country want to eliminate birthright citizenship? Because too many brown people are getting into the country?

This knee-jerk response is designed to paint anyone who questions birthright citizenship as it is manifested today as a racist who should slink away in shame and shut up on the subject.

I am a rational, reasonable middle-of-the-road independent (and liberal on most social issues) who questions why this practice should be continued when such obvious abuses occur (people rushing across the border to give birth in order to capitalize on this situation). To paint me and everyone like me as a racist only serves to quelch rational debate on a very complex issue. There are some excellent reasons to be in support of elimination of birthright citizenship that have nothing to do with not wanting "brown people" in the U.S. Once again, racism is used to dance around the compelling real issues.

Abyss · Senior Member

nbachris2788 wrote:

FFF wrote:

Perhaps birthright citizenship made sense when this was originally adopted, but can anyone give a rational explanation why this makes sense in today's environment. Why should the children born to people here illegally be granted automatic citizenship?

Why would it have made sense long time ago if it doesn't make sense now?

Because illegal immigrants weren't a big portion of our population "a long time ago", for one. How many children have been born to illegal immigrants in the US? 5MM+? That's 1.5% of the US population. Absolutely enormous.

nbachris2788 · Senior Member

FFF wrote:

Perhaps birthright citizenship made sense when this was originally adopted, but can anyone give a rational explanation why this makes sense in today's environment. Why should the children born to people here illegally be granted automatic citizenship?

Why would it have made sense long time ago if it doesn't make sense now?

Abyss · Senior Member

romanigypsyeyes wrote:

^ So would permanent resident or green card holder or someone with refugee status qualify? I'm curious as to where people draw the line of "here legally".

Well, I think we should personally do away with political asylum immigration completely...

I don't have a problem with green card holder though (although that would have changed if the DREAM act passed - which utterly butchered what a 'green card' actually entailed).

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

^ So would permanent resident or green card holder or someone with refugee status qualify? I'm curious as to where people draw the line of "here legally".

Abyss · Senior Member

soccerguy315 wrote:

IMO one of the parents should be a citizen (or here legally, I suppose) for the kid to be a citizen.

I don't have a problem with that. I'd make it a bit stricter though. No tourism babies.

soccerguy315 · Guru

IMO one of the parents should be a citizen (or here legally, I suppose) for the kid to be a citizen.

FFF · Veteran Member

Perhaps birthright citizenship made sense when this was originally adopted, but can anyone give a rational explanation why this makes sense in today's environment. Why should the children born to people here illegally be granted automatic citizenship?

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

^ I'm just sick of the interchangeability in this thread and many others. This law would not just affect Mexicans and I'm sick of people acting like that's the case.

Abyss · Senior Member

romanigypsyeyes wrote:

"Mexican" and "illegal citizen" are not interchangeable.

Always the fountain of knowledge.

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

"Mexican" and "illegal citizen" are not interchangeable.

Abyss · Senior Member

Jordcin wrote:

Abyss wrote:

Perhaps it's because Mexicans perform at a much lower level than the average (on a variety of demographic statistics).
_______________________-

I don't get it. Do you mean they perform work at lower wages?

Among other things.

They also have far high illegitimacy, poorer academics, higher criminality.

This isn't exactly a surprise for anyone who has lived in Southern California or any place that has a significant Mexican population (NM/AZ/TX).

Jordcin · Veteran Member

Abyss wrote:

Perhaps it's because Mexicans perform at a much lower level than the average (on a variety of demographic statistics).
_______________________-

I don't get it. Do you mean they perform work at lower wages?

romanigypsyeyes · Guru

Hmm.. by this logic, my mother would not have been a citizen. I wonder if I then would have been a citizen because my mother would not have been. I've traced back my dad's side and I don't think he would be a legal citizen either. I know my grandmother wasn't a citizen until my dad was almost in high school and I'm sure my grandfather's family didn't come here legally either. We're all white btw.

Interesting to see if this goes forward. It'd be flat out dumb for Michigan to this. Hey, Synder, don't you think we have MUCH MUCH bigger issues than this? I don't even like the fact that he was elected, but I'll be flat-out pissed if our bankrupt state wastes resources on something that WILL ultimately fail.

Abyss · Senior Member

I'd be fine with merely kicking the parents out and establishing orphanages for the 'legal' children.

Abyss · Senior Member

Jordcin wrote:

But why would this country want to eliminate birthright citizenship? Because too many brown people are getting into the country?

Perhaps it's because Mexicans perform at a much lower level than the average (on a variety of demographic statistics).

catahoula · Guru

Of course getting 2/3 of the country to do anything today is flat impossible....
The Supreme Court is the usual remedy for those who don't approve of the way the constitution is being read and I agree that its a pity that Arizona is considering declaring war.

Maybe if O instructs Holder to cease the provocation, hostilities can be averted.

Jordcin · Veteran Member

But why would this country want to eliminate birthright citizenship? Because too many brown people are getting into the country?

BigG · Guru

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/14-states-may-target-birthright-citizenship

Remember the Civil War?

I think that settled the issue of state vs. federal primacy very thoroughly.

No state law can obviate the Constitution of the United States. Passing a law that tries may be treason. The 14th Amendment is part of the ultimate law of the land.

If enough people want to eliminate birthright citizenship, they have a mechanism to do that; Constitutional amendment.

The 18th Amendment established Prohibition.
The twenty-first Amendment repealed the 18th.

Of course getting 2/3 of the country to do anything today is flat impossible....

-- Edited by BigG on Monday 3rd of January 2011 06:52:19 PM

-- Edited by BigG on Monday 3rd of January 2011 06:52:45 PM