Free Republic

The task facing Americans is actually less daunting than the one that confronted the Founding Fathers, for they had to create a new Constitution from whole cloth, when the very principle of constitutionalism was novel and unproven. We the People merely have to defend the Constitution.I know, let’s us vote in a new batch of politicians, that should do it just fine.

Obviously, the States which ratified the 14th Amendment had no idea they were approving baby-killing, sodomy, and homosexual marriage! And who knows what “rights” the pervs on the supreme Court will find next? A “right” to have sex with children, perhaps? Since you can kill them, why can’t you have sex with them?
Section 1 of the 14th Amendment says:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside…”

The key is not just being born in the United States, but being born “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

The 14th Amendment does NOT confer citizenship on babies of illegals born here – just as it does not confer citizenship on the babies of foreign diplomats stationed here. Babies born here of illegal aliens are not citizens of the United States b/c their illegal alien parents are subject to the jurisdiction of the Country they left.

The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

As with most cases of our government bastardizing the interpretation of our Constitution some serious housecleaning needs be done.

I have grown very weary of politicians who vote to illegally extend our generous social benefits to illegal aliens and other criminals.

The Emancipation Proclamation of January 1, 1863, now also sold as a moral measure by the sainted Lincoln, in fact freed not a single slave. It applied only in the Southern states, where it was intended to ignite a revolt.
Lincoln himself said, in letter after letter after document after speech and before Congress, over and over and over, that he would not oppose slavery in the South if only it would come back to the Union, and–yes, boys and girls–he wanted to send blacks back to Africa.
IN fact, the North wanted no blacks of any kind, having discovered that sweating European immigrants was more profitable. If you own slaves, you have to feed them and care for them no matter the business climate. This was suited to an agricultural economy. But the North was industrial. It made more sense to pay helpless immigrants almost nothing while they lived in tubercular filth with their children working twelve hours a day and dying of preventable diseases. After all, the next ship in would bring more. In short, it was the moral equivalent of slavery but more cost-effective and without the stigma.