• 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!

Amend Constitution to end birthright citizenship?

Should the US Constitution's Bill Of Rights be amended to end automatic birthright citizenship?

  • Total voters
    89
I wonder if trump realises that 4 of his children will lose their US citizenship if this is passed. Ivanka, Donnie Jr, Eric and Barren were all born BEFORE their mothers became US citizens. Or does trump expect his children will be exempt because he thinks he is some sort of God and can do whatever he likes?
 
JoanDavis said:
I wonder if trump realises that 4 of his children will lose their US citizenship if this is passed. Ivanka, Donnie Jr, Eric and Barren were all born BEFORE their mothers became US citizens. Or does trump expect his children will be exempt because he thinks he is some sort of God and can do whatever he likes?
Click to expand...

Not quite, because their father was a natural born citizen. Read the bill, it is directed at children whose parents were never citizens. This misunderstanding on your part is typical of people who depend on the lies of others rather than read for themselves. As well, it clarifies a date requirement for birth subsequent to obtaining parental citizenship, a requirement that is ambiguous under current law, subject to the whim of whatever administrative current policy may be. Per se, when application is made for a political asylum, each child is listed as a requestor but not for prior issue of others who obtain citizenship. This doesn't deny citizenship, merely clarifies the need for separate application. Reasonable modification of the bill could offer a concurrent easing of requirements for prior issue.
 
I can see no compelling reason to make any changes to the 14th Amendment.
 
ClaraD said:
anyone who uses Ann Coulter as a source needs their head examined.
Click to expand...


Honors graduate from Cornell University School of Arts and Sciences (Class of 1984) and received her J.D. from The University of Michigan Law School.
She was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.
She worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for former Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-MI).
She clerked for the Hon. Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors program for outstanding law school graduates.
She was named one of the top 100 Public Intellectuals by federal judge Richard A. Posner in 2001, an appointee of Republican president Ronald Reagan

First came to prominence with the publication of the book "High Crimes and Misdemeanors", which was a best-seller in 1998. Two subsequent books, "Slander" and "Treason", have also been best-sellers.
[/QUOTE]

Please post your resume for review.
 
chuckiechan said:
Honors graduate from Cornell University School of Arts and Sciences (Class of 1984) and received her J.D. from The University of Michigan Law School.
She was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.
She worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for former Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-MI).
She clerked for the Hon. Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors program for outstanding law school graduates.
She was named one of the top 100 Public Intellectuals by federal judge Richard A. Posner in 2001, an appointee of Republican president Ronald Reagan

First came to prominence with the publication of the book "High Crimes and Misdemeanors", which was a best-seller in 1998. Two subsequent books, "Slander" and "Treason", have also been best-sellers.
Click to expand...

Please post your resume for review.[/QUOTE]

This idiot thought that increased radiation exposure is good for you and would reduce the chances of cancer...

She also said this

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

I don't care what credentials she claims...she is as stupid and ammoral as a box of rocks.
 
ClaraD said:
Please post your resume for review.
Click to expand...

This idiot thought that increased radiation exposure is good for you and would reduce the chances of cancer...

She also said this

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

I don't care what credentials she claims...she is as stupid and ammoral as a box of rocks.[/QUOTE]

Controversial yes, stupid no.

So what she said about birthright citizenship stands as a valid argument:

Ann Coulter - October 31, 2018 - THE TRUE HISTORY OF MILLSTONE BABIES

No Supreme Court has ever held that children born to illegal aliens are citizens. No Congress has deliberated and decided to grant that right. It's a made-up right, grounded only in the smoke and mirrors around Justice Brennan's 1982 footnote.
 
chuckiechan said:
This idiot thought that increased radiation exposure is good for you and would reduce the chances of cancer...

She also said this

"My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

I don't care what credentials she claims...she is as stupid and ammoral as a box of rocks.
Click to expand...

Controversial yes, stupid no.

So what she said about birthright citizenship stands as a valid argument:

Ann Coulter - October 31, 2018 - THE TRUE HISTORY OF MILLSTONE BABIES

No Supreme Court has ever held that children born to illegal aliens are citizens. No Congress has deliberated and decided to grant that right. It's a made-up right, grounded only in the smoke and mirrors around Justice Brennan's 1982 footnote.
[/QUOTE]

claiming radation exposure will reduce cancer is stupid...period....and yes, Wong was declared a citizen...his parents were not legally in the US...they were not even living in the US at the time of the case, because they had been REMOVED.
 
Media_Truth said:
What the non-Republicans should say, is, "Ok, I'll go with your view on the 14th, if you go for Single-Payer Health Care."
Click to expand...

As long as we don't give amnesty to any of the 11-20 million illegals already in the US and we exclude low life filth that refuse to work from receiving benefits, then I'll be down.
 
ClaraD said:
And if the country they are from does not recognize their children under jus sanguinis? So the child ends up stateless through no fault of their own?
Click to expand...
An interesting question.
1. In such a case, it would be the fault of the parents, and not of either state involved, assuming both posted their law clearly and publicly.
2. I"m not aware of the countries that refuse to recognize children of their citizens as citizens in such a situation. Can you cite them?
 
The US, Mexico and Canada are the only major western countries with birthright citizenship. And Canada and Mexico have some restrictions to prevent tourism babies.
The rest of the major western world powers have gotten rid of it. It makes no sense. It would be easy to change and still keep the option of gaining citizenship available under more restrictive rules.
Having to live in the country for 10 years before you can get citizenship, having to have had parents that lived legally in the country for 10 years before their children were citizens. Number of years are adjustable but something needs to be done. Britian, France and Ireland all have in the last 10-15 years done away with it. The countries that still have it are small western countries in latin and south america. It does not provide a benefit to the country in the modern era, and is easily abused. Even the original bill did not allow children of ambassadors from other countries. Also if you read the background papers written by the author of the original bill, he did not intend for illegals or temporary residents to have citizenship.
 
CitizenBasehead said:
People with lower a IQ then our national average, lower the national IQ which is detrimental to our society. Also a lot of low skill jobs will be replaced by robots in the near future. As far as skilled labor goes, we have a lot better people to chose from in our own country.


These people will contribute nothing of value to our society.
Click to expand...

Do you know what I mean by 'source?'
 
A woman enter the country illegally and gives birth to a child. The woman is then deported. What should be done with the child? Should the woman NOT be deported because her child is an American citizen?
In my opinion a child born should be entitled to the citizenship of the Mother regardless of where the birth takes place. That, in my opinion should be International law. A woman who immigrates to another country but not yet a citizen, should she give birth to a child, the child should be granted a birth certificate by the embassy or a consulate of her country and the child be considered a legal immigrant until which time the Mother is naturalized along with the child if such occurs prior to the child becoming emancipated. If the child becomes emancipated prior to the Mother becoming a citizen, the child would remain a legal immigrant and be required to apply for citizenship on its own.
The 14th amendment was passed in 1868, long before we had to begin controlling immigration. It badly needs to be updated, as do our immigration laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom