Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    montana
    Posts
    1,308

    Opinion: Rethinking the birthright battle

    The text of the 14th Amendment strongly indicates that it is unconstitutional to deny citizenship to children born in the United States on the grounds that their parents are illegal immigrants.

    The relevant sentence reads: “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.â€

  2. #2
    Senior Member Dixie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Texas - Occupied State - The Front Line
    Posts
    35,072
    The text of the 14th Amendment strongly indicates that it is unconstitutional to deny citizenship to children born in the United States on the grounds that their parents are illegal immigrants.
    Someone has a reading and comprehension problem.

    Dixie
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member roundabout's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    3,445
    Only those that smoke potent dope could create such a hard spin.

  4. #4
    Senior Member vistalad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    3,036
    The author of the citizenship clause was clear about its not pertaining to foreigners, aliens, or the children of diplomats.

    Illegal aliens cannot convey citizenship to their offspring, because that status was never theirs to convey.

    Another of the authors mentioned "allegiance." Citizens can't have any foreign allegiance. That's probably why, to this day, the Oath Of Allegiance which all legal immigants must swear requires their specifcally giving up the allegiance to which they previously were subject.
    ************************************************** ********************************
    Americans first in this magnificent country

    American jobs for American workers

    Fair trade, not free trade

  5. #5
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55,883
    Always leave it to a DemoQuack who try as they might still can't tell the difference between a freed slave in the protection of the US government and under the jurisdiction of the United States and an illegal alien who isn't.



    A female DemoQuack in Utah has introduced a bill that would make illegal aliens slaves in that state subject to mandatory work. You know one of the big disadvantages of Apartheid in South Africa, was mandatory work, and being unemployed was a crime that sent you to prison. In Utah, they aren't sending you to prison, they're sending you clean out of their state, not because you were there in violation of US immigration law, OH NOES, but because you were unemployed and no longer being a slave, no longer stealing jobs from Americans, no longer deflating American wages, no longer mooching off the taxpayers.

    I mean is this not the absolute epitome of DemoQuackery??!!

    Wake Up Utah ... send this bill to an RIP in committee and speak out loudly and strongly against this bill and any other that forces anyone to work.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  6. #6
    Senior Member WavTek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,431
    Maybe we could attack birthright citizenship from this angle:

    In the majority opinion delivered by the court in Roe v. Wade, viability was defined as "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid. Viability is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks." When the court ruled in 1973, the then-current medical technology suggested that viability could occur as early as 24 weeks. Advances over the past three decades have allowed fetuses that are a few weeks less than 24 weeks old to survive outside the mother's womb.
    If the unborn child of an illegal alien is considered viable before it is actually born, then when it is born, it is also an illegal alien, just like it's parents, having inherited their illegal status, at the point of viability.
    REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER!

  7. #7
    Senior Member ReformUSA2012's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,305
    Just the normal nonsense arguement by the pro illegals.

    A pregnant mother hides from US law during the period of pregnancy. The pregnant mother avoids US law in the hospital by the fact that as a humane society we can't immediately ship a woman in labor across the border as such would likely end in death for both. With this of course the unborn baby along with mother hid from US Law and the laws jurisdiction. Yes the baby had no choice in the matter but neither did the citizens or even the law as the law wasn't given the ability to apply its legal jurisdiction.

  8. #8
    sugarhighwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    408
    I would like this author to explain to me why the Native Americans were denied US Citizenship under the 14th Amendment. After all, Native Americans were born on US Soil but were still denied Citizenship until years later when Congress had to pass a separate act.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by roundabout
    Only those that smoke potent dope could create such a hard spin.
    I have never created a hard spin . It's not the dope but the actual thoughts of the writer . I'm thinking the writer is a Martini drinker .

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •