Republicans trying to burn the Constitution and disgusted by immigrants

I am someone who usually appreciates measured discussion of an issue but this is a shameless appeal to xenophobia and paranoia. Our country has survived and prospered because of immigration. We are great because unlike many other countries we renew ourselves through successive waves of immigrants who bring their energy and industriousness to this country.

My parents came just shortly after Civil Rights were passed to people to of all colors. Not long after that they gave birth to me. I am an American by birth even though my father and mother are not. I love this country but if they succeed in repealing the birthright for citizenship I will seriously consider renouncing my citizenship as that will mean that this country is not welcoming of my people like my parents and their son.

Thankfully I doubt this repeal will succeed but when I hear people like John McCain who I had thought were above things like this it stings.

 

I say we we make a deal, repeal both the 14th Amendment and the 2nd Amendment.

But seriously, let's face it, our founding fathers had no idea that mega powerful guns capable of wiping out 50 people in a few minutes would be easily obtainable by psychologically distressed individuals no more than they could anticipate millions of people flooding into the country illegally and having babies here.

 

What gun is that? If it is not fictional let me know cause I'm buying it.

 

Does this remind anyone of the Reich Citizenship Law?

 

If this happens America will have a negative birthrate. Good luck growing the economy then.

 

They are called semi-automatic firearms. Many examples. You can get an AK-47 for about $500 bucks. It's been around for about 50 years at least.

I'd recommend doing some research before buying though, and you probably should make sure you know hot to take the safety off.

 

**** like this is why I am glad republicans are no longer in power.

 

Immigration reform is a two way street. If we're going to have a pathway to citizenship, ending the birthright tourism scam should be part of that legislation.

 

Your title is a bit over the top.

Nobody is disgusted by "LEGAL IMMIGRANTS" , heck my wife and grandparents immigrated to this great nation. What we the people are disgusted by is the "ILLEGAL ALIENS" who are given sancturary cities to hide in, are not fully pursued by the very federal government who is tasked with enforcing this law, the lack of concern and cart blanch attitude from the federal government on this issue in general, and the political grand standing that goes on when it suites their purposes.

The whole notion of the "anchor baby" issue is nonsensical. Name me one other developed nation who allows this to occur where you can have a baby in that country and magically you and your new baby are automatically citizens?

 

Interesting point. Not sure I totally agree, but you're right on both counts.

 

Oh noez.. Anchor baby iz in mah nayborhood drinkin mah beer.



So you propose changing the constitution?

 

Canada and pretty much every other nation in North, South and Central America.

Tell us some more stories, grandpa oddson; are you not an anchor spouse?

 

I am not sure that changing the constitution is required here.

Anyone with common sense and a clear understanding of the intentions of the 14th amendment can come to the conclusion that "anchor babies" are not legal and should not be allowed.

That woud be like my wife getting pregnant and then we travel to Europe and have the baby in Switzerland. Does that make our child and us automatic citizens in this country? NO! Why? Because that is just plain stupid and idiotic think that would be the case, they have a proper immigration process that you must go through.

 

Concur. Birthright citizenship should be debated without rancor. Since infants cannot vote, this issue will not impact elections for another 20 years. Those born here up to this point are citizens -- laws cannot be enacted retroactively.

In my view, if at least one biological parent is a citizen, the child is a citizen. However, if neither biological parent is a legal citizen, the child is not a citizen. That's pretty simple and, IMO, fair. Otherwise, this is like a pair of acquitted robbers who ask, "Does this mean we can keep the money we stole?"

 

FYI the 14 Amendment wasn't written by the Founding Fathers as it was enacted following the Civil War. Although even then the country was dealing with a surge of immigration from Irish fleeing the Potato Famine. Even during then though there were similar nativist sentiments expressed against the Irish that we hear now.

 

Are you a lawyer? Do you have formal education on constitutional law? Have you even read the 14th amendment? Have you read case law challenging the Citizenship Clause?

Section 1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Please read the first sentence over and over again. And once you've done that... read it again.

Please... site some case law on ILLEGAL ALIENS having babies that supports your argument.

 

I disagree. It reeks of pandering to far-right nutjobs. If they actually wanted to address the issue, all they need to do is enforce the existing laws regarding illegal immigration. Specifically, punish the companies that hire them (I'm looking at you, agribusiness!). Of course, they won't because that would mean they would have to inflict pain on corporations, which stings their pocketbooks more than running roughshod over the citizenry.

 

Thanks for chiming in....regardless of the childs status the parents are not legal citizens of the country. Heck why even have laws and borders, just open up the everything to everyone?

Well Karl,, no I actually love and respenct my wife enough that I traveled half way around the world to marry her in her native country so her family could be present and we then legally filed the paperwork to bring her stateside.

 

Speaking as an "anchor baby" since my parents weren't even permanent residents when I was born I have as much right to be an American as you or anyone else whose family had been here for generations. I don't know for sure whether my parents stayed here for me or for other reasons but my family has contributed to this country as and probably more than the scions of those who came here generations before. Both my parents became teachers at Rice, Baylor College of Medicine, and U of H educating 20+ years of students including another immigrant named Akeem Olajuwon.

I started a business that has added to the beauty and economy of this country and have also taught others at the University of Minnesota.

What this effort to change the law says to me is that I am less of an American than others and am undeserving of citizenship. This country was built by people like me, people's whose parents saw this land as a land of opportunity and wanted that opportunity for their children. If we are "anchor babies" we are the anchors that rooted into a strange land and built it.

 

I'm also going to point out that these type of sentiments are not new to this country and if Know Nothings and other Nativist groups had their way many of you now who are descended from Irish, Italians, Poles and other Eastern Europeans, heck even Germans, ancestors might also have not been allowed to be citizens or even into this country.

Further why this issue bothers me is that there were laws like this on the books for decades that prevented Chinese, even those who born here, from being citizens. There were even laws that prevented Chinese from bringing over women so we wouldn't breed here. My generation of Chinese immigrants and their children have been called a "model minority" that would never have been the case if laws like the Exclusion Acts still existed.