• 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!

Should the 14th amendment be amended or repealed?

Should the 14th Amendment be changed or repealed

  • Yes, it should be completely repealed

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    44

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Apparently, the Senate will soon have hearings regarding the Fourteenth Article of Amendment to the United States Constitution. It was passed in the wake of the United States Civil War to ensure that all Blacks whose forced servitude was ended in the 1860s. Given that the world is different today and the challenges facing the Union have changed, should the amendment be changed, repealed, or left untouched?
 

soccerboy22

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
10,723
Reaction score
4,120
Location
A warm place
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I think I would be OK to changing the amendment to saying either one parent is a U.S. citizen or the parents of the child are here under a green card or are legally working towards U.S. citizenship.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have no problem with amending the amendment, or if that's not possible (which I think it isn't) essentially removing it and passing a more updated version of it.
 

Gipper

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
25,120
Reaction score
7,658
Location
Theoretical Physics Lab
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I can't really be all that much of a constitutionalist because so many of the worries and problems of today simply didn't exist back in those days.

I would vote for an amendment. People claim hatred for loopholes in tons of other laws. Anchor babies are a loophole.
 

earthworm

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2005
Messages
5,728
Reaction score
904
Location
Goldsboro,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Other
I note only one animal here - good.
This amendment was caused by a Supreme Court decision - I think the Court of that time did not consider the Negro to be human ..
Those who believe that the amendment should be erased do, IMO, have a point.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Yes, it probably needs to be amended however, it should not be done lightly and it should not be done by this Congress. I do not have confidence this Congress can wake up and dress themselves without spending billions on underwear skid marks and how they get there... let alone doing something as important as amending the Constitution. We should wait for a while until the Congress is more competent... hopefully not decades.
 

Chuz Life

Banned
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
3,981
Reaction score
385
Location
Nun-ya-dang Bidness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I have no problem with amending the amendment, or if that's not possible (which I think it isn't) essentially removing it and passing a more updated version of it.
I'm with you on this one,... as it will inevitably bring the definition of "personhood" to the (Roberts led) SCOTUS and that will certainly go a long way towards ending the legality of elective abortion.
 

American

Constitutionalist
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
88,596
Reaction score
27,840
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I can't really be all that much of a constitutionalist because so many of the worries and problems of today simply didn't exist back in those days.

I would vote for an amendment. People claim hatred for loopholes in tons of other laws. Anchor babies are a loophole.
I can't believe you're going from libertarian to liberal. I just can't believe it. :shock:
 

American

Constitutionalist
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
88,596
Reaction score
27,840
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I don't believe citizenship should flow from children to parents. I also believe that the children of illegals should not be citizens. Beyond that it's difficult to decide, but probably at least one parent must be a citizen....but I'm not certain.
 

JohnWOlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,594
Reaction score
1,257
Location
Kentucky
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Leave it alone. What we need to do is change that 13th amendment I got to get **** done.
 

American

Constitutionalist
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
88,596
Reaction score
27,840
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Leave it alone. What we need to do is change that 13th amendment I got to get **** done.
Yeah, let's delete the last 10 or 15 amendments and start over. :lamo
 

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,798
Reaction score
20,614
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
No I can't trust Congress to just fix that amendment.
Since there is no limitation on what they could add or take away from The Constitution.
This statement puzzles me since the congress is what made all of the amendments in the first place. (states too ofc)
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,955
Reaction score
12,423
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
This statement puzzles me since the congress is what made all of the amendments in the first place. (states too ofc)
To me, at that time, there were enough idealists to keep the morally corrupt caged.
Now, there isn't a chance in hell, that I would trust any current congress to amend it.
 

tacomancer

Big Scary Liberal
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
39,798
Reaction score
20,614
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
To me, at that time, there were enough idealists to keep the morally corrupt caged.
Now, there isn't a chance in hell, that I would trust any current congress to amend it.
Ok, that makes more sense and you are probably right.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
49,737
Reaction score
31,563
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
amended how?
as it stands, those who were born on American soil are American citizens with the only exception being those who are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. that would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example; the child of an enemy soldier would be another (and more far fetched)

that definition of citizenship at section one of the 14th amendment appears to be clear cut. what would be a better way to define who does (and/or does not) enjoy American citizenship?
 

Korimyr the Rat

Baby Eating Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
19,553
Reaction score
15,756
Location
Cheyenne, WY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
that definition of citizenship at section one of the 14th amendment appears to be clear cut. what would be a better way to define who does (and/or does not) enjoy American citizenship?
Simple enough. Children born with one parent who is a US citizen are automatically US citizens. Otherwise, they must undergo the naturalization process.
 

SgtRock

#1A #2A #Trump2020 #KAG
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
7,021
Reaction score
2,894
Location
Deep in the Heart of Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
My wife was not a citizen when my two children where born. I was born in the USA myself and have always been a citizen. My wife was a legal immigrant and I believe that it was right that my children be citizens of the USA. My wife has been a naturalized citizen now for 18 years. I believe that the 14th amendment to the constitution should be changed when it comes to illegal immigrants not legal immigrants. There is a huge difference. Children of illegal immigrants born in the US should not be born citizens. They should be deported along with there parents regardles of there age when they are discovered in our country.
 
Last edited:

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
16,849
Reaction score
9,651
Location
Rocky Mtn. High
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I have no problem with amending the amendment, or if that's not possible (which I think it isn't) essentially removing it and passing a more updated version of it.
Wow! I thought conservatives were strict constitutionalists. It seems that many believe that the constitution, as written, is almost divinely inspired, if not written by God himself. It seems every time we have a new nominee to the SCOTUS, we have to deal with whether the nominee is a strict Constitutionalist or an activist. We consistently hear about the damn liberals that advocate a contemporary review/interpretation of our founder's intent as blasphemous as re-writting the Bible (bad example, some conservative goof is already on this Conservative Bible Project - Conservapedia). Anyway, the strict constitutionalists generally believe the Constitution is beyond reproach*.

* - apparently except where the Constitution is inconvenient or otherwise inconsistent with their political beliefs.


BTW - nothing is a bigger waste of time, expense and energy than amending the Constitution (even talking about it is silly). We couldn't get the ERA done in the 70's in a much more co-operative political environment. If you don't like the Constitution says, I suggest you just deal with it.
 
Last edited:

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
49,737
Reaction score
31,563
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Simple enough. Children born with one parent who is a US citizen are automatically US citizens. Otherwise, they must undergo the naturalization process.
ok, so the child born and raised in iran to a mother who is lebanese and an American father would be found as an American citizen (and a lebanese citizen and an iranian citizen)

what about the child born to a single woman who has arrived at the hospital without her birth certificate
let's make it worse. the mom dies at childbirth

the child who is born and abandoned on the steps of the catholic church (in the USA). American citizen - or not

would imagine that there are a number of permutations where making the citizenship of the child dependent upon that of a parent a circumstance causing the citizenship to remain in question
 

DrunkenAsparagus

Devourer of Poor Children
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
4,496
Reaction score
1,878
Location
DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I understand changing or repealing anchor baby laws to punish the parents, but why punish the child for the actions of their parents by withholding citizenship?
 

ludahai

Defender of the Faith
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
10,320
Reaction score
2,115
Location
Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I have no problem with amending the amendment, or if that's not possible (which I think it isn't) essentially removing it and passing a more updated version of it.
Of course the amendment can be amendment. It wouldn't be the first to be amended through a later amendment...
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,340
Reaction score
16,230
Location
A place where common sense exists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Apparently, the Senate will soon have hearings regarding the Fourteenth Article of Amendment to the United States Constitution. It was passed in the wake of the United States Civil War to ensure that all Blacks whose forced servitude was ended in the 1860s. Given that the world is different today and the challenges facing the Union have changed, should the amendment be changed, repealed, or left untouched?

Section 1 of the 14th was never created to give any and everyone born on US soil citizenship.That's why there is the "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" part. That's why the Indian citizenship act of 1924 and the nationality act of 1940 were created. That said I would still like a judge to rule with this in mind. I would also like the 14th amended to clarify this and give birth right citizenship only to children whose mothers are American citizens(any sap can claim to be the father on a birth certificate,which is why the father should not be used as a claim for birthright citizenship).

I would also like part of the immigration and nationality act of 1965 that allows for the chain migration of relatives other than spouse and minor children to be repealed. This would end anchor babies regardless if the 14th was amended or not amended.Because the 14th amendment is not what allows anchor babies.
 
Top Bottom