Posted on 12/09/2011 9:13:40 PM PST by moonshinner_09
What does the term “anchor baby” mean? If you were to look it up in the American Heritage Dictionary, you would find a new definition since last week.
The term was among some 10,000 new words and phrases in the fifth edition of the dictionary, published in November. It was defined as: “A child born to a noncitizen mother in a country that grants automatic citizenship to children born on its soil, especially such a child born to parents seeking to secure eventual citizenship for themselves and often other members of their family.”
But when Steve Kleinedler, the executive editor of the dictionary, read that definition during a radio interview last month, it troubled Mary Giovagnoli, the director of the Immigration Policy Center, a pro-immigration research group in Washington.
The once-obscure term has been used frequently in the recent debate over whether to change the Constitution to deny automatic American citizenship to children born in this country to illegal immigrant parents
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Fails to state that illegals use these anchor babies as nothing more than commodities to loot the US gravy train......
1. SS nos issued to newborns are used by illegal parents to establish multiple fake identities.......even to vote illegally.
2. EITC payments to illegals has skyrocketed to some $20 billion......faking kids names is the MO.....and ups the payout.
“The only way to know if it really is an anchor baby. Is to throw it in the river and see if it sinks.”
If it does, at least the parents can take comfort in the fact that their child wasn’t a witch...
“What if she just goes around having one night stands until fertilization occurs?”
In my part of NJ many of the anchor babies have 2 illegal parents; the women don’t mix much with the gringos because of the language barrier (among other things).
Most of the animus is a figment of a liberal mind too. Supposedly ‘illegal alien’ is a hateful phrase too when in fact it is simply a legal term.
Good catch, but what if there is no real relationship between the citizen father and the alien mother? What if she just goes around having one night stands until fertilization occurs?
When registering the birth of a child to a non-citizen mother, it would be necessary only to establish that the biological father is, indeed, a U.S. citizen.
The law does not require a "real" relationship to exist. It does not concern itself with the personal feelings of the persons involved, nor with the specific circumstances of conception - other than that one of the gametes must come from a U.S. citizen.
Now, the issue of phony marriages to obtain Green Cards - that is an entirely different matter.
Regards,
The best way to look at this is to consider who is excluded. Those born in the US who are NOT subject to its jurisdiction are a fairly precisely defined group. This group, according to common law, includes primarily foreign diplomats, essentially those with official diplomatic immunity, and armed foreign invaders.
Members of these groups are not subject to the laws of the US and thus children born to them on US soil are not citizens.
Everybody else, who are subject to US jurisdiction while on US soil, is eligible.
I seriously doubt the Congress and the States intended the legalization of anchor babies when they passed the amendment, but that is what it says.
Any other interpretation, IMO, requires ignoring the plain meaning of the words, similar to the way gun control people try to ignore the plain meaning of the 2nd Amendment.
With lines like that you can write for Mel Brooks.
We already have “newspeak” and the “thought police” are in full operation.
Think “hate crimes” and politically correct replacement words.
The “child” is raised into their Mexican culture of crime and corruption, only to go on to learn the ways of welfare and all of the benefits available to all but the working, tax paying American citizen.
Rats do a similar destructive act to our society and property. Do you love baby rats too?
Dictionaries and the rabid liberal left can try to redefine words, actually thoughts, but they only succeed in adding more bullshit words to the liberal lexicon. Right-thinking AMERICANS know what anchor babies are, and they should not be granted citizenship unless at least one of their parents are not already American Citizens, period.
...when Steve Kleinedler, the executive editor of the dictionary, read that definition during a radio interview last month, it troubled Mary Giovagnoli, the director of the Immigration Policy Center, a pro-immigration research group...Who pays this b's bills?
I figure that the children of illegal aliens, if shipped out of the US with their parents, would not be subject to US laws.
The various Indian tribes, on their reservations, would also not be subject to the Jurisdiction of the US, though they could be if they moved off the reservation.
Political Correctness on steriods.
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.