Posted on 05/22/2006 12:49:34 PM PDT by SmithL
And if we reduce the attractions, the border becomes easier to secure.
But, you are correct. We lack the political will to change the current law.
in the Constitution, yes it does. Congress got around that by recognizing birthright citizenship in the 1965 Naturalization Act, if I recall correctly. It's not an artefact of the Constitution—it's merely the creation of Congressional legislation, and as such, it's subject to being modified by the Congress.
Obviously there needs to be a "grandfather" clause.
No need to state the obvious.
It is clear where your hopes and your sympathies lie...
It may not be sane, but it will never be changed. After all, the debate in 2006 is about amnesty/citizenship, not expulsion/deportation. So imagine where the line will be drawn in another 20 years. This bears repeating: the 14th will never be (a) amended/repealed; and/or (b) re-interpreted.
Since this is the case, it behooves one to think out the long-term strategic implications of what this means. By way of reference, we have the Union's most populous & wealthy state as an example. Consider politics, economics, governance, health, education, welfare, criminal justice, etc. There's never been an easier time to slam-dunk predict the future.
"A person born in the United States attain the status, with respect to citizenship, of the person's birth mother at the time of birth."
Deal?
And if it can't be modified by the Congress, obviously it should have been a Constitutional Amendment in the first place.
My (adopoted) grandparents came here illegally. One of my (birth) parents was illegal. I was adopted by an American family. I've never considered myself anything other than American.
Since this is the case, it behooves...
Since I reject your premise, I don't need to waste time commenting here....
In the case of birthright citizenship, you'll find that it's explicitly granted in 8 U.S.C. 12 § 1401 (link).
If the Congress felt motivated enough, it could revoke this statute and deny "birthright" citizenship. Frankly, I doubt we have the moral fortitude to do anything of the sort at this point in our decline, so I am certainly not holding my breath.
US Citizenship really should be a two-step thing.
All well and good the child is born here, but just because kittens are birthed in an oven, doesn't automatically make them biscuits. Unless the child is provided with the tools to some day eventually exercise those rights as a citizen, the rights should not be simply granted as of a certain age being achieved.
For instance, why do 14-year-olds not have the vote? The reason is, that they lack the necessary maturity and judgment to exercise the franchise, a concept that our founding fathers had no trouble with when the age of 21 was agreed upon as the standard by which the attainment of wisdom had been satisfactorily demonstrated. That age standard has since been lowered to 18, and yet, the other qualifications have been lowered to an even greater degree.
Gender, the ownership of property, or having European ancestry are no longer the criteria to exercise the franchise to vote in elections. A certain degree of literacy was once held up as a desirable thing, but for a time, this too was struck down. There seems to be a growing realization that the applicant to vote should be sufficiently rational and literate enough to at least sign his or her own name, and answer a few simple questions. Conviction in a court of law of a felony is, in most jurisdictions, sufficient justification for denying the applicant the right to register to vote. And everybody has the option of not voting, or even registering to vote.
Dying almost always makes the exercise of the franchise to vote a moot point, unless there are unscrupulous individuals who would assume the identity of the deceased, for purposes of voting, and win some kind of immortality as the really dedicated citizen.
The returning holder of the birthright, who may or may not have been educated in the finer points of the exercise of citizenship, should at least be tested for knowledge of the customs and understanding of the legislative, executive and judicial branches of the government at all levels, before full rights as a citizen are granted. The holder of the birthright does have a priority to enter the country, but a certification of full citizenship cannot be granted until attainment certain objectives have been demonstrated.
And I've never considered myself anything other than a completely tolerant muslim...
Our words betray us. Always. Not just the self-serving ones.
Well, I disagree.
The level of anger among American citizens has never been higher, and is climbing daily...
You look around a hospital ward at the babies there -- all deserve to be extended citizenship, and anything less is an affront to justice for that child.
I agree with that statement wholeheartedly.
And I can comfortably say that the Federal government, in all of its Departments, is actively ignoring American citizens now more than ever before.
Don't get me wrong: I'm always hopeful that we'll pull it together enough to survive. But, much like the Confederates towards the close of the Civil War, I don't have much to go on other than hope at the moment.
It would seem so to me, but I think the part you highlighted its the very part they have been using to give the children of illegals citizenship at birth. Very strange.
How do you figure that "birthright citizenship is a great thing... and anything less is an affront to justice for that child?" We are THE ONLY NATION on the planet that currently issues citizenship to children who happen to be born within our borders. And even given that, the history of doing so ONLY dates back to 1965.
If it's not good enough for the REST of the world (there's that pesky "international law" again), why pray tell, is it being forced down OUR throats?
This is not "justice" for the child. This is massive "injustice" towards American citizens, one which cheapens the value of citizenship for people who insist on playing by the rules.
Birthright citizenship is a travesty that is a pox on our Nation's history.
Sounds good to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.