• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Steve King Moves Forward on Bill to End Birthright Citizenship

Others have made it quite clear that it is about entrenching intergenerational inherited social class. In the face of founding and since then widening acceptance of individual merit and rights, certainly innocence of the child in spite of his parents transgressions.

"Intergenerational inherited social class". My what big words you use! Only one problem. I fully welcome and want the immigration process. So long as people come here legally I have absolutely no problem with them.

And how is it punishing the child for the parents transgressions? Is it "punishment" to withhold citizenship? How? They have the citizenship of thier parents country and can go back there at any time so its not like they are countryless (if thats even a word). With your kind of arguement then the whole world should just be deemed citizens of the US. Sorry but we do not have the resources or space to house and take care of the entire world.
 
The fact that the 14th Amendment passed shows that there was enough approval for it to be accepted. Those that debated things other than what the writer intended mean nothing due to that approval to pass the 14th.
What was accepted were the words. What they mean, under any number of circumstances, is even after that remains something of an open question. Otherwise we would not have judges interpreting law when we could just dial up and ask the still living legislators and Presidents.
Which is why they implemented an amendment process.
Not just that, also the above. For both philosophical and practical reasons.
Ignoring the spirit of the law and just going by the letter of the law can be dangerous. Take a look at the Sex Registry. Its intent was to put those that were truely dangerous rapists in the spotlight. But in reality due to people just going by the letter of the law we have people on it that just simply pissed behind a tree and 18 year olds that had consensual sex with thier 17 and 1 day shy of 18 year old partners.
There is indeed a danger in that, which is why we have judges and they have some leeway for examination and consideration of ’spirit’. Whether or not a given judge chooses to exercise this leeway. *shrug* Sometimes they do, sometimes they [arguably] do not.

But to claim that the v Wong Kim Ark decision is only about letter drastically misses its point, it is also about ‘spirit’. Indeed spirit and letter are not entirely exclusive from each other.
 
Last edited:
What was accepted were the words. What they mean, under any number of circumstances, is even after that remains something of an open question. Otherwise we would not have judges interpreting law when we could just dial up and ask the still living legislators and Presidents.

What was accepted were not just the words but also the authors interpretation of those words. Otherwise people would have demanded that the wording of it be changed. As it is people ignore parts of it to push their agenda.

There is indeed a danger in that, which is why we have judges and they have some leeway for examination and consideration of ’spirit’. Whether or not a given judge chooses to exercise this leeway. *shrug* Sometimes they do, sometimes they [arguably] do not.

We also have the authors words of any given law. Which the judges are suppose to examine. And no, they are not suppose to have any leeway in how they interpret a law. The only leeway that they have is that which people (particularly those with agendas) give them.

But to claim that the v Wong Kim Ark decision is only about letter drastically misses its point, it is also about ‘spirit’. Indeed spirit and letter are not entirely exclusive from each other.

People always have to bring up that case. Point of fact is that Wong Kim's parents were legal citizens. As such Wong Kim inherited birth right citizenship. We're talking about people that came here illegally, were not citizens and had a baby that was granted citizenship through a wrong interpretation of the 14th amendment. In point of fact there has been no case that SCOTUS has dealt with that specifically talked about parents offspring when those parents were in the country illegally and were NOT citizens.
 
People always have to bring up that case. Point of fact is that Wong Kim's parents were legal citizens.
Holy crap. :eek: No they were not citizens of the US, they were aliens. Further the ruling sets the test for that aspect of the 14th so it is entirely applicable. There has been some contention voiced about parents status as “illegal aliens” resulting in a different outcome. However that has never been challenged (a pretty good sign it is not seriously in question) and suffers from, among other things, the problem of how can they be illegal under US law without being subject to US laws.

If you are that turned around it is pretty clear any discussion with you on this is a dead end…
 
Another example of the rightwing extremists throwing one of their principles (ie Original Intent) under the bus in order to pursue their hateful beliefs
 
Holy crap. :eek: No they were not citizens of the US, they were aliens. Further the ruling sets the test for that aspect of the 14th so it is entirely applicable. There has been some contention voiced about parents status as “illegal aliens” resulting in a different outcome. However that has never been challenged (a pretty good sign it is not seriously in question) and suffers from, among other things, the problem of how can they be illegal under US law without being subject to US laws.

If you are that turned around it is pretty clear any discussion with you on this is a dead end…

I'm sorry, you're right, I misspoke. They were not citizens. But they were in the US legally. Still a far cry from illegal aliens.

The "jurisdiction of the US laws" was talking about which country they were primarily subject to. An illegal from Ireland is primarily subject to Irelands laws. Why do you think that our law enforcement is required by law to inform illegal aliens of their right to counsel by a representitive from an embassy of thier home country? Because they are primarily subject to their home country. I can't remember the case but this one illegal got let go because the LEO's failed to inform him of that right, despite telling him his miranda rights and that he had a right to an attorney. He still got deported of course, but the rest of the charges against him were dropped.
 
Another example of the rightwing extremists throwing one of their principles (ie Original Intent) under the bus in order to pursue their hateful beliefs

Sorry but original intent is exactly what we are trying to get back.
 
Another freaky tea party pseudoproblem that just shows how out of step and irrelevant the GOP has become.

Nobody cares about this but a few trailer park Alabama. Meanwhile the real issues of the country are being addressed by progressives and Democrats, and America is leaving Republicans in the dustbin of history.
 
The flooding of America with third-world low IQ immigrants is a disaster. Average mestizo IQ 85. High birth rate.
Obsolete people in a tech-society. A rational society would not tolerate the presence of illegals or the outrageous
legal immigration rate of appx. one million a year.
 
The flooding of America with third-world low IQ immigrants is a disaster. Average mestizo IQ 85. High birth rate.
Obsolete people in a tech-society. A rational society would not tolerate the presence of illegals or the outrageous
legal immigration rate of appx. one million a year.

In the eyes of God, you are no better than them.
 
The flooding of America with third-world low IQ immigrants is a disaster. Average mestizo IQ 85. High birth rate.
Obsolete people in a tech-society. A rational society would not tolerate the presence of illegals or the outrageous
legal immigration rate of appx. one million a year.


You need to blame your republican buddies for the immigration mess we have now...business wanted the workforce diluted...americans wouldnt work for coolie wages anymore and that was unacceptable to the rich...so as usual the republicans who always carry the richs water allowed illegal immigration and even FOUGHT for it years ago...talking about how we needed the labor.
Then we have republican heroes like Reagan who gave millions of illegals amnesty to encourage more illegal immigration.
Now when the democrats finally realized HEY we can get ALOT of votes being for illegal immigration...now the repbulblicans want to whine...TOO LATE...party over.
 
The "jurisdiction of the US laws" was talking about which country they were primarily subject to. An illegal from Ireland is primarily subject to Irelands laws. Why do you think that our law enforcement is required by law to inform illegal aliens of their right to counsel by a representitive from an embassy of thier home country? Because they are primarily subject to their home country. I can't remember the case but this one illegal got let go because the LEO's failed to inform him of that right, despite telling him his miranda rights and that he had a right to an attorney. He still got deported of course, but the rest of the charges against him were dropped.
Any such requirement (I am curious about you tracking down and linking any such, though) is US law, our sovereign choice. They are subject to lawful prosecution of US law, even in your scenario described this is the case.

Whether a resident is here officially or without authorization they are subject to US law. Unless they have diplomatic standing, and thus are explicitly not subject to US law (assuming the foreign country does not wave such because the diplomat has been such an embarrassing prick)…and therefore any child born of such does not gain citizenship.
 
The flooding of America with third-world low IQ immigrants is a disaster. Average mestizo IQ 85. High birth rate.
Obsolete people in a tech-society. A rational society would not tolerate the presence of illegals or the outrageous
legal immigration rate of appx. one million a year.

Hey look, kids: this is the real tea party agenda. Ugly ignorant racism, just like the old days.
 
Back
Top Bottom