• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Proposal to Change the 14th amendment on "anchor babies"

The Giant Noodle

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
7,332
Reaction score
2,010
Location
Northern Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Anti-Immigration Lawmaker Seeks Support In ‘A Battle Of Epic Proportions’
October 28, 2010 by Personal Liberty News Desk

Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce (R-Mesa) is collecting support from lawmakers across the United States in an effort to eliminate automatic citizenship rights for children of illegal immigrants.

Pearce has garnered national headlines for crafting the bill, SB 1070, which is widely considered to be the toughest anti-immigrant law in the country. During a news conference on Oct. 19, Pearce said that the government needs to reinterpret the language of the 14th Amendment, The Associated Press reports.

Pearce believes that guaranteed citizenship to those born in the U.S. does not apply to children of illegal immigrants because such families do not owe allegiance to the U.S.
[
link to www.personalliberty.com]
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Troubadour

Banned
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
464
Reaction score
181
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Pearce believes that guaranteed citizenship to those born in the U.S. does not apply to children of illegal immigrants because such families do not owe allegiance to the U.S.

To be quite honest, I don't believe a man who would propose something this repugnant owes allegiance to the U.S. In this country, we do not dump the debts and obligations of parents on to their children, and we do not deport people who've never lived anywhere else or known any other life. If Mr. Pearce is not okay with that, maybe he had better consider leaving.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
To be quite honest, I don't believe a man who would propose something this repugnant owes allegiance to the U.S. In this country, we do not dump the debts and obligations of parents on to their children, and we do not deport people who've never lived anywhere else or known any other life. If Mr. Pearce is not okay with that, maybe he had better consider leaving.

Did you look at the links I provided on the historical content of the 14th? One could argue that the child/baby allegiance is with the parents country because they are a minor. A quote from the first link: "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.


Like the song goes, "would like to help you son, but your too young to vote"
 

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
it makes total sense to do this. The fact is, this provision is an inventive to break the law.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Anti-Immigration Lawmaker Seeks Support In ‘A Battle Of Epic Proportions’
October 28, 2010 by Personal Liberty News Desk

Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce (R-Mesa) is collecting support from lawmakers across the United States in an effort to eliminate automatic citizenship rights for children of illegal immigrants.

Pearce has garnered national headlines for crafting the bill, SB 1070, which is widely considered to be the toughest anti-immigrant law in the country. During a news conference on Oct. 19, Pearce said that the government needs to reinterpret the language of the 14th Amendment, The Associated Press reports.

Pearce believes that guaranteed citizenship to those born in the U.S. does not apply to children of illegal immigrants because such families do not owe allegiance to the U.S.
[
link to www.personalliberty.com]

The 14th Amendment doesn't need to be changed.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
119,501
Reaction score
34,952
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
In the US, all babies are born free. I don't want that to change. I don't think slaves or the subjects of tyranny should be born here or any free country. What kind of people are we if we cannot protect those born on our land.
 
Last edited:

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
In the US, all babies are born free. I don't want that to change. I don't think slaves or the subjects of tyranny should be born here or any free country. What kind of people are we if we cannot protect those born on our land.

I wish to be the type of people that don't reward criminal behavior
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
119,501
Reaction score
34,952
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If not being able to live with your child, to see them grow and to educate them in your beliefs - so that they can live free - is a reward, then let it be.
 
Last edited:

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,661
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Anti-Immigration Lawmaker Seeks Support In ‘A Battle Of Epic Proportions’
October 28, 2010 by Personal Liberty News Desk

Arizona State Senator Russell Pearce (R-Mesa) is collecting support from lawmakers across the United States in an effort to eliminate automatic citizenship rights for children of illegal immigrants.

Pearce has garnered national headlines for crafting the bill, SB 1070, which is widely considered to be the toughest anti-immigrant law in the country. During a news conference on Oct. 19, Pearce said that the government needs to reinterpret the language of the 14th Amendment, The Associated Press reports.

Pearce believes that guaranteed citizenship to those born in the U.S. does not apply to children of illegal immigrants because such families do not owe allegiance to the U.S.
[
link to www.personalliberty.com]

I think citizenship in any country, and certainly in the United States, is a privilege and not a right. I would support this re-interpretation in a heartbeat. Frankly, I'm rather sick and tired of hearing about "What would the Founding Fathers think?" Screw the founding fathers. I hate that expression....founding fathers.

If our Constitution is a living document, which I believe it must be, then we need to revisit some of its wording in light of the world we live in -- not the world our founding fathers lived in.

Other than destroying the USA with nuclear weapons, no country on earth will be able to subjugate our people or take over our government. Our government will be taken over from within -- and we're well on that road right now.
 

Troubadour

Banned
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
464
Reaction score
181
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Did you look at the links I provided on the historical content of the 14th? One could argue that the child/baby allegiance is with the parents country because they are a minor.

Then "allegiance" is not even a valid concept in the case of minors, and the underlying premise of the bill is false. A child of illegal immigrants born in this country has no lesser claim to American citizenship than a child of citizens - unless you wish to claim that the foundational basis of American citizenship is blood, in which case you're entering pretty sinister territory.

With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child.

Another example where that's only valid if you insist on blood as the determining factor.
 
Last edited:

Rogue

Conspiratist
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
608
Reaction score
53
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
A look at the anchor baby abuse industry. First, we should all know that the anchor baby abuse industry long ago was taken over by the marxist/socialist progressive democrats, as part of their attempt to takeover America, and turned into a progressive democratic farm program complete with 18 years of democratic welfare conditioning to ensure that the hispanic anchors turn into future hispanic democratic voters. About 300,000 future hispanic democratic voters are born every year, these days, and go immediately on the 18 years of democratic welfare conditionins. So that means there are 300,000 one year old hispanic future democratic voters, about 300,000 two year old hispanic future democratic voters, almost 300,000 three year old hispanic future democratic voters, maybe 290,000 hispanic four years old, etc, etc, you get the idea, and finally, maybe 200,000 18 year old hispanic future democratic voters coming off of their 18 years of democratic welfare conditioning. When you add it up that's maybe 5 million future hispanic anchors just waiting in line to become future democratic voters. Wake up sheeple. The only way to change the 14th amendment to to first kick to the curb, remove from office, a bunch of marxist/socialist amnesty supporting progressive democratic politicians fighting any and all attempts to stop illegal immigration.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Then "allegiance" is not even a valid concept in the case of minors, and the underlying premise of the bill is false. A child of illegal immigrants born in this country has no lesser claim to American citizenship than a child of citizens - unless you wish to claim that the foundational basis of American citizenship is blood, in which case you're entering pretty sinister territory.



Another example where that's only valid if you insist on blood as the determining factor.

We disagree on each others opinion. I think the SC original rulings were valid and should remain so today. IMO, it is reasonalbe to claim the parents citizenship determines the offsprings. A nation has a right to protect itself from illegals.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
A look at the anchor baby abuse industry. First, we should all know that the anchor baby abuse industry long ago was taken over by the marxist/socialist progressive democrats, as part of their attempt to takeover America, and turned into a progressive democratic farm program complete with 18 years of democratic welfare conditioning to ensure that the hispanic anchors turn into future hispanic democratic voters. About 300,000 future hispanic democratic voters are born every year, these days, and go immediately on the 18 years of democratic welfare conditionins. So that means there are 300,000 one year old hispanic future democratic voters, about 300,000 two year old hispanic future democratic voters, almost 300,000 three year old hispanic future democratic voters, maybe 290,000 hispanic four years old, etc, etc, you get the idea, and finally, maybe 200,000 18 year old hispanic future democratic voters coming off of their 18 years of democratic welfare conditioning. When you add it up that's maybe 5 million future hispanic anchors just waiting in line to become future democratic voters. Wake up sheeple. The only way to change the 14th amendment to to first kick to the curb, remove from office, a bunch of marxist/socialist amnesty supporting progressive democratic politicians fighting any and all attempts to stop illegal immigration.

You know, there's a lot of Cubans in Miami who vote for the GOP because Republicans keep up the amnesty of those fleeing the communist regime of Castro. What about them?
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
119,501
Reaction score
34,952
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Cuba is a dictatorship, they are political refugees. Are the others?
 

Bonnie Franklin

New member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I would LOVE to see anchor baby citizenship stopped, along with chain migration.
 

molten_dragon

Anti-Hypocrite
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
4,918
Location
Southeast Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I've never understood the whole anchor baby thing anyway. Okay, so you're an illegal immigrant who has given birth to a baby who is now an american citizen. That doesn't (or shouldn't anyway), mean you can stay here illegally. If you're caught, you have a difficult decision to make. Take your baby back to wherever you come from with you, or leave it here in the US to be raised by someone else. The child is a US citizen, so it can stay in the country. The parents are not, so they can't. End of story.

That being said, I have no real problems with revising the 14th amendment so that only children born to at least one citizen or legal immigrant gain automatic citizenship at birth.
 

molten_dragon

Anti-Hypocrite
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
4,918
Location
Southeast Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
A look at the anchor baby abuse industry. First, we should all know that the anchor baby abuse industry long ago was taken over by the marxist/socialist progressive democrats, as part of their attempt to takeover America, and turned into a progressive democratic farm program complete with 18 years of democratic welfare conditioning to ensure that the hispanic anchors turn into future hispanic democratic voters. About 300,000 future hispanic democratic voters are born every year, these days, and go immediately on the 18 years of democratic welfare conditionins. So that means there are 300,000 one year old hispanic future democratic voters, about 300,000 two year old hispanic future democratic voters, almost 300,000 three year old hispanic future democratic voters, maybe 290,000 hispanic four years old, etc, etc, you get the idea, and finally, maybe 200,000 18 year old hispanic future democratic voters coming off of their 18 years of democratic welfare conditioning. When you add it up that's maybe 5 million future hispanic anchors just waiting in line to become future democratic voters. Wake up sheeple. The only way to change the 14th amendment to to first kick to the curb, remove from office, a bunch of marxist/socialist amnesty supporting progressive democratic politicians fighting any and all attempts to stop illegal immigration.

Your over-the-top rhetoric makes me laugh.

That being said, illegal immigration is hardly a problem that can be blamed solely on the democrats. The last few republican presidents (and congresses) haven't exactly gone out of their way to do anything about it either.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
25,459
Reaction score
9,553
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Your over-the-top rhetoric makes me laugh.

That being said, illegal immigration is hardly a problem that can be blamed solely on the democrats. The last few republican presidents (and congresses) haven't exactly gone out of their way to do anything about it either.

That has been stated in other illegal immigration threads. IMO, both parties share the blame. The difference is some States are making illegal immigration an issue and putting pressure on the Feds.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,315
Reaction score
6,468
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Cuba is a dictatorship, they are political refugees. Are the others?

So it's okay for Cubans to cross 90 miles of ocean to escape a communist dictatorship to take advantage of their human rights and enjoy basic freedoms but it's bad for Mexicans to cross a desert or a river to escape criminal cartels to do the same?
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
119,501
Reaction score
34,952
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I didn't write that either was good or bad. I wrote that one is a political refugee and the other is not. Political refugees get special consideration everywhere in the world and are allowed to stay in countries when returning to their homeland would most likely result in them being killed or imprisoned forever simply because they snuck out. It's not like providing political asylum is a uniquely US policy; your comparison is invalid.
 
Last edited:

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I don't necessarily have a problem with anyone born in the U.S. being a U.S. citizen. However, there's nothing that says that just because you are an U.S. citizen, you have to live here. If your parents are illegal aliens, deport them. They can choose to take their kid with them, or leave them with a legal resident family member in the U.S. After the kid turns 18, they're more than welcome to come back on their own, without their criminal alien parents. Actions have consequences. These people need to realize that. Just waddling across the border to drop your spawn doesn't magically give you a right to stay in the U.S.
 

Rogue

Conspiratist
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
608
Reaction score
53
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Common sense would dictate that all pregnant illegal alien women be rounded up and deported back to where they came from before they give birth so the child would be born in the country that it's parents were nationals of. The illegal parents of any current minor anchors should be deported and the minor children deported with them too so that the US doesn't have to support these children with up to 18 years of welfare. These illegal deported parents are all guilty of identity theft and should be charged with felonies, preventing the anchor from ever being able to sponsor the parents to come to the US in the future when the anchor turns 21. These are things that could be done right now while Americans are waiting for the 14th amendment to be amended to rule out automatic citizenship for children born in the US to illegals.
 

Wake

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,536
Reaction score
2,437
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If people knowingly break the laws of our nation...
And they have children...
Why should those children of illegal aliens be considered citizens?
 

MKULTRABOY

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
10,621
Reaction score
2,104
Location
In your dreams...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I didn't write that either was good or bad. I wrote that one is a political refugee and the other is not. Political refugees get special consideration everywhere in the world and are allowed to stay in countries when returning to their homeland would most likely result in them being killed or imprisoned forever simply because they snuck out. It's not like providing political asylum is a uniquely US policy; your comparison is invalid.

What about economic refugees? That doesn't qualify?
It's like when they changed the plaque on the statue of liberty.
 
Top Bottom