All I can say based on reading your posts, especially your last two, is that you ought to be really really careful tossing around the word "ignorant."
e.g., "illegal immegration was extremely rare before 1965".
Moreover, none of your examples regarding Taiwan have any relevance whatsoever regarding the question of whether our tradition and law allows a child born in the U.S. to be considered a citizen. Yet you keep gnawing at them like a dog on a rubber bone. Nor have you been able to find a single case where anyone having been born in the U.S. has been legally denied a claim to citezenship since the 14th Amendment.
You simply have no argument other than to say you don't like the current situation. But that was never the point. You've run completely out of ammo and have lost the debate.
No zook, the point was and is "illegal". Not immigration, not Taiwan, not what you belive, or desire to be fact.
..you ought to be really really careful tossing around the word "ignorant."
In your case its easy to see that it applies. You answer no pertinent questions, you proffer no facts or relate empirical experience. So far, your only tactic of debate is repudiation without substantiation and simplistic repetition. The tactic of a child or the ignorant when they have no argument. Therefore, zook, I yield you the point, such as it is, but not on any facts that you offered and defended, but only to escape an onerous argument with an ignorant man.