Posted on 12/08/2006 7:28:47 PM PST by dennisw
Despite being trapped in a cramped airplane thousands of feet in the air, a pregnant Mexican woman en route to Chicago found herself in the right place at the right time -- giving birth to a healthy baby girl with the help of a fellow passenger. The 42-year-old woman gave birth to a 7-pound, 8-ounce girl approximately a half hour before the plane touched down at O'Hare just before midnight Wednesday, said Eve Rodriguez, Chicago Fire Department assistant director of media affairs.
Baby 'alert, looking around' The woman, a Mexican citizen, was on a Mexicana Airlines flight from Guadalajara when she went into labor. "I was kind of surprised how calm everyone was," said Lori Perez who, along with fellow paramedic Enoch Benson of O'Hare's Rescue Station 3, boarded the plane to take mother and baby to Resurrection Medical Center.
"Mom was in good spirits, she said there was a doctor on board and that she wasn't in a lot of pain."
Perez said that although she didn't catch the obstetrician's name, his handiwork was good.
"The baby girl was not really crying; she was alert and looking around," Perez said.
Airspace matters Mexicana Airlines officials did not return calls to explain whether the woman had presented a doctor's authorization to fly six months or more into a pregnancy, as its own rules require. Whether the baby girl is the United States' newest citizen remains to be seen, according to Maria Elena Garcia-Upson, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokeswoman.
An immigration law provision makes a child born in airspace over U.S. territory eligible for citizenship.
But if the parents decide to file an application, officials will investigate whether the child was born in Mexican air-space or over international waters.
"The parents can go ahead and pursue citizenship for the child if they so wish," said Garcia-Upson.
"But we don't decide on cases like this in a public forum. Facts need to be determined first."
She should have flown American Airlines.
"Conspiracy to have a baby in CONUS airspace"/
---it's just another form of the illegal border invasion, and believe me, it will catch on because it's got too many advantages the border crossing doesn't---airplane tickets don't cost anywhere near as much as smugglers/aiders-and-abetters/greased palms, etc. , no danger to getting apprehended and sent back and starting at Square One,etc/I guess the only obstacle is having some kind of necessary documents, but I am not even sure about that or what they would be or how easy they would be to forge. Either way, Mexico wins, we lose.
Ahhhh, the "how wonderful" syndrome----they count on it---everyone from CAIR when they see some gullible Americans guiltily weigh in on the terribly insensitive treatment the six Imams got when they were booted off the US Air plane, and offering "to help", to the emergency corrective surgeries we always find a way of doing on Third Worlders, to all the little South of the Border boys and girls who serve as the passport and calling card for illegals (we're doing it "for the children" once again, because their own countries are mired in unspeakable corruption and there is no room or resources or opportunity for them.) The whole point about this "how wonderful" is , that even if it were restricted to just Mexico, THERE IS VIRTUALLY NO END TO IT. 20,30,40 percent of Mexico's population will be here eventually, having been successfully gotten rid of by their own government, countless Muslims will also be continuing to establish sociopolitical beachheads here,(AND out-reproducing us) as they have done in Europe primarily, AND one way or another, we will be PAYING for our OWN marginalization (while noddingly agreeing with all those who claim we are marginalizing THEM, paying for our own suicides, and we will be in a permanent state of CHAOS, unmanageable CHAOS---and unfortunately that is what our politicians, and apparently cajungirl WANTS. There is NOTHING that gets my blood boiling faster than the sheer SLOPPINESS of all this, and the fact that there is NO MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY OF IT---it is just all shoved down our throats, demagogue-style.
Hey, you may be right. 50% of illegals only have to get knocked up, find the money for an airplane ticket, and buy the ticket on the week that they're scheduled to deliver. Compared to paying lots more money to risk dying of heat exhaustion in the desert, that sounds quite economical and is bound to catch on. Guess we won't have to spend money on that fence, then. Or only build half of it.
"Or only build half of it"
----or build it around all Mexican airports.
That would be more expensive, seeing how airplanes can easily fly over most fences.
Hadn't thought of that , thanks, now I don't have to waste time emailing all of Congress with my "idea".
I'd advise against it.
I am not suggesting doing anything for this woman or her child. I am suggesting that when your politics gets in the way of your being happy or relieved a baby and Mother are fine then you are over an edge and don't act like a human being.
But carry on. You are so intent on it anyway. No room for any gladness that a baby was born on a plane and Mothere and child are fine.
I am not really intent on anything: I would rather be happy knowing that our elected reps are doing the rational thing for all of us: unfortunately this is NOT the case, and nothing is likely to change in the forseeable future.Even thinking that policy should be (and in fact IS) based on what makes us "feel good" is another way of lying to ourselves and living in denial, and not seeing the big picture of just what IS really happening in the world.I've typed enough sentences already on this subject and thread that are overlooked ,unaddressed and unanswered....I'm done.
100% agree... we are importing poverty and importing anarchy. Just look at how anarchic Mexico is.
"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."
Senator Jacob Howard, co-author of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, 1866.
THe really beguiling part of this whole "phenomenon" is, that it is entirely the doing of our bought-and-paid-for politicians, who will pander to any cause and any "special interest" as long as there are any votes(new constituencies) and/or money (political contributions, paybacks, graft) in it for them. They create chaos, counting on the masses of 3rd-10th generation Americans to bear the brunt economically and emotionally to ALL of their deliberate MISTAKES/ -they are not "mistakes" actually, but they ARE deliberate, and are the only way they have found to keep foisting their vision of America as a vast churning chaotic dystopia on all of us. Unchecked immigration has been allowed to continue for a quarter century, while at the same time we are always told we are facing crises involving resources of all kinds, which ALSO presumably have a political solution you have to go to politicians for. Ahhhhh, jeez.....don't get me started....
Source please.
I'm sorry I failed to copy the source.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1525714/posts
GOP-led push to end birthright citizenship brewing in U.S. House
or
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1741295/posts
or
http://federalistblog.us/2005/12/birthright_citizenship_fable.html
(snip) Sen. Jacob Howard, who wrote the Fourteenth's Citizenship Clause believed the same thing as Bingham as evidenced by his introduction of the clause to the US Senate as follows:
[T]his amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that 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.
And what was this law of the land already Howard speaks of? "All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power" are citizens of the United States. So what Howard is making clear here is the simple fact his citizenship clause is no different then the law of the land already which demanded allegiance to the United States by at least the child's father before that child could be considered a U.S. born citizen. This alone makes liberal construction to the contrary impossible.
http://africanamerica.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/79160213/m/3101054333
or
http://www.newswithviews.com/public_comm/public_commentary32.htm
(snip) To understand the correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment we need to understand what the co-author of the amendment wrote about the Amendment. In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard wrote, "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." Senator Howard wrote the addition phrase specifically because he wanted to make it clear that the simple accident of birth in the US is not sufficient to justify citizenship.
The US Supreme Court recognized this when they ruled in 1873 that the phrase (and subject to the jurisdiction thereof) excluded "children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States." Since the court recognized that the children of foreign citizens and diplomats should not be granted US citizenship, why should anyone think that the children of those that enter the US illegally are subject to the jurisdiction of the US government? The simple answer is no thinking person would. The anchor baby parents are neither US citizens, subject to US jurisdiction, nor do they owe any allegiance to the US. Federal immigration laws require aliens to renounce all allegiance to any foreign government and to support the US Constitution to become citizens. The parents of anchor babies never fulfilled this obligation and were never "subject to the jurisdiction" of the US.
Both the author of the 14th Amendment and the US Supreme Court recognized that an alien mother and her baby are subject to the jurisdiction of their native country - not the US. The 14th Amendment wasn't created to provide an end run for aliens to defy US immigration laws. But politicians have subverted the Constitution and allowed citizenship to any child born in the US. This misinterpretation is not accidental - it is intentional. An error of this magnitude could not be accidental.
or
I n Plyler v. Doe (1982), (the U.S.) Supreme Court (reaffirmed that) the 14th Amendment's phrases "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" and "within its jurisdiction" were essentially equivalent and that both referred primarily to physical presence. It held that that illegal immigrants residing in a state are "within the jurisdiction" of that state, and added in a footnote that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment "jurisdiction" can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful ."
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2006/08/sinking_anchor_.html
You were correct to bring it to my attention. I won't be that careless again.
"The truth is that, while inconceivable to many here, most Mexicans love their homes, families and have no desire to be American citizens."
That is the whole problem, hello? They are coming here in droves and they don't care about our country. Why should we let them in or let them stay? So they can undercut wages and living conditions? How is that a positive for the average American? Don't we have the right to decide who immigrates here based on our needs? If not, why not?
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.