Ann Coulter: LOOK WHO'S 'NATIVIST' NOW! (Even SWEDEN doesn’t allow “Anchor Babies”)

"Nativism in American politics has become so rampant that it is considered scandalous in Republican circles for a judge to acknowledge paying any attention to foreign courts and their legal rulings." -- New York Times editorial, Aug. 3, 2010

The New York Times runs this same smug editorial every few months -- at least I think it's the same editorial -- to vent its spleen at conservatives who object to American judges relying on foreign law to interpret the U.S. Constitution.

But when it comes to anchor babies, The New York Times and the entire Democratic establishment plug their ears and hum rather than consider foreign laws on citizenship. (For more on this, see "Mexican immigration law versus U.S. immigration law.")

Needless to say, America is the only developed nation that allows illegal aliens to gain full citizenship for their children merely by dropping them on U.S. soil.

Take Sweden -- one of the left's favorite countries. Not only is there no birthright citizenship, but even the children of legal immigrants cannot become Swedish citizens simply by being born there. At least one parent must be a citizen for birth on Swedish soil to confer citizenship.

(Applicants also have to know the lyrics to at least one ABBA song, which explains why you don't see groups of Mexicans congregating outside Ikea stores.)

Liberals are constantly hectoring Americans to adopt Sweden's generous welfare policies without considering that one reason Sweden's welfare policies haven't bankrupted the country (yet) is that the Swedes don't grant citizenship to the children of any deadbeat who manages the spectacular feat of giving birth on Swedish soil.

In Britain, only birth to at least one British citizen or the highest class of legal immigrant, a "settled" resident with the right to remain, such as Irish citizens, confers citizenship on a child born in England. And if the British birthright is through the father, he must be married to the mother (probably a relic from Victorian times when marriage was considered an important institution).

Even Canada, the country most similar to the United States, grants citizenship upon birth -- but excludes the noncitizen parents of anchor babies from receiving benefits, such as medical care, schooling and other free stuff given to Canadian citizens.

AND PLEASE Let’s not confuse Ann’s political message with evangelizing the lost.
The closest Ann has gotten to evangelizing is her comment on coverting them or killing them (much more inline here w/ islamic culture rather than christian culture).
As I posted on the OTHER thread -- to someone who was also apparently aware of what Ann has written more recently than 9/12/2001:

-- snip --

I understand.

I have an unfair advantage, having actually READ almost all of Ann's columns. :o)

Try THIS one:

IF YOU CAN FIND A BETTER DEAL, TAKE IT!
(January 6, 2010)

I have rarely seen ANYONE (in or outside of the traditional "four walls" of the church) deliver the Great Commission as powerfully as Ann did in this one (nominally POLITICAL) column.

The whole thing is GREAT (and relatively short) -- and it ends, wonderfully, this way:

-- snip --
...You can be washing the dishes or walking your dog or just sitting there minding your business hating Susan Sarandon and accept that God sent his only son to die for your sins and rise from the dead ... and you're in!

"Because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Romans 10:9.

If you do that, every rotten, sinful thing you've ever done is gone from you. You're every bit as much a Christian as the pope or Billy Graham.

No fine print, no "your mileage may vary," no blackout dates. God ought to do a TV spot: "I'm God Almighty, and if you can find a better deal than the one I'm offering, take it."

The Gospel makes this point approximately 1,000 times. Here are a few examples at random:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16.

"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God." Ephesians 2:8.

"For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23.

In a boiling rage, liberals constantly accuse Christians of being "judgmental." No, we're relieved.

Christianity is also the hardest religion in the world because, if you believe Christ died for your sins and rose from the dead, you have no choice but to give your life entirely over to Him.
No more sexual promiscuity, no lying, no cheating, no stealing, no killing inconvenient old people or unborn babies -- no doing what all the other kids do.

And no more caring what the world thinks of you -- because, as Jesus warned in a prophecy constantly fulfilled by liberals: The world will hate you.

With Christianity, your sins are forgiven, the slate is wiped clean and your eternal life is guaranteed through nothing you did yourself, even though you don't deserve it. It's the best deal in the universe.
COPYRIGHT 2009 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

ANYONE that "preaches the Word" so eloquently gets a LOT of grace from me...

...even if I do not always understand (or agree with) EVERYTHING that she says and does.

Good post and I agree w/ most all of it. BTW I do tend to read Ann Coulter 99% of the time and always appreciate anyone anywhere willing to present the true gospel message.

The problem is you can not have your cake and eat it too. If you are a christian you must be in the world but not of the world. You must not love worldly ways and the filhty lucre associated with worldly ways. You must be like a ship at sea - willing to sail anywhere the wind (Holy Spirit) takes you w/o allowing the water (world/sin) to enter into your boat and eventually sinking it.

Any christian can lose his voice (power of evangelizing) through hypocrisy, thru trying to emulate world, thru willingly erasing distinctions and discriminations against sin, thru accepting the idea of ‘when in Rome do as the Romans do’, OR basically thru compromising and rationalizing (rationing lies).

The best way to sum it all up is the quote ‘to preach the Word to all the world and when necessary even use words.’

I don’t recall reading that particular AC column, but ‘hating Susan Sarandon’? - what happened to love the sinner / hate the sin? What happens to not taking God seriously and literally at His Word regarding forgiveness. I think the problem is we all too often enjoy AC taking revenge on the left - misaligning who the true enemy is - the enemy is not my brother or sister - the enemy is the devil/satan/lucifer - the father of all lies, spiritiual stronholds set against the Will and Word and Love of God.

The other problem for most christians is in failing in discernment, distinction and discrimination. God declares that only He sees and knows the truth in the heart of every believer yet all too often we want to be associated w/ the ‘higher ups’ - the Popes, Billy Graham, etc. - this is pride and pride is sin. Sin is selfishness and sooner or later pride speaks to selfishness claiming a little cake for the here and now rather than waiting for the great wedding feast ushering in God’s Kingdom and Rule - when our chains will be broken completely.

Basically I think AC needs to mature a lot before she continues to try to be a ‘christian leader’ - but then we all do, we all fall short. I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy in the current news.

It is good to see that we agree on MANY things. :o)

I don't even agree with Ann on EVERYTHING. ;)

But, I'm not quite sure that I agree with you on the universal evil of wealth, implied by your use of the phrase "filthy lucre."

Money, righteously earned, can be a powerful force for GOOD in the world, IMHO.

The Good Samaritan wouldn't have been as much help to the man he found beaten in the street, if he were the BROKE Samaritan. ;)

³³But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him.
³⁴He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him.
³⁵The next day he took out two silver coins^[c] and gave them to the innkeeper.
'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

AC has obviously made and saved enough money to provide for all of her material needs - esp when you include future royalties. She should be more discriminating than ever before simply because she does not need the money. By accepting the money she lends credibility to their cause even if her speech totally discredits them. Not endorsing ‘universal evil’ of wealth by we must always remember ‘the love of money is the root of all evil.’ Too many modern-day christians are stalking after wealth to the complete exclusion of any yearning after God.

The reason I refer to it as filthy lucre is twofold - the source of the money and worse yet a christian accepting that money from a group to which she should be idealogically opposed. I’m not saying she can not associate w/ sinners - I’ve had many co-workers over the years who either were sodomites or gave the appearances of same. I’m saying that no good can come from her accepting that money from those opposed to christianity.

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.