Replies

But it's another thing entirely to claim that this is the way the Founding Fathers set up the Constitution, and that's what it means, when that clearly is not the case.

It clearly *IS* the case. The alternative is that the founders put an inoperative or pointless clause into Article II, and that they were too stupid to foresee "anchor babies" even though they had many thousands of them to deal with after the war.

The Founders just didn't consider that the influence of British trained lawyers would screw up their work so badly a hundred years later.

Or, to put it a different way: If you don't like the Constitution, amend it. That's been done 27 times already.

And most of the ones subsequent to the 10th, were either badly written, or just stupid. The exception being the 27th amendment, which was in fact, written by the founders.

The 14th, in particular has been the cause of much Mischief and destruction to American society.

The alternative is that the founders put an inoperative or pointless clause into Article II, and that they were too stupid to foresee "anchor babies" even though they had many thousands of them to deal with after the war.

Both of these claims are just silly. "Anchor babies" after the Revolutionary War? Not in any modern sense.

They didn't have people coming to the United States to have "anchor babies." They did have an issue with the division of Americans into US citizens and English subjects. This is the natural result of any successful war for Independence.

And they couldn't have foreseen modern "anchor babies," so your charge of stupidity against the Founders is just silly.

The 14th, in particular has been the cause of much Mischief and destruction to American society.

So are you proposing that we repeal the 14th Amendment??

Yeah, let's repeal the Amendment whose purpose was to make sure everyone understood "them n*****s were citizens, too."

Conversing with you just gets more and more surreal.