• 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!

Should the census count illegals?

Should the census count illegals? Post a Poll

  • Total voters
    28
Yes, so they can locate them & deport them.....
 
Partisan said:
Yes, so they can locate them & deport them.....
Click to expand...

I do not think a census has ever been used to deport illegals. I believe this has to do with getting more funding and representation. States should not be rewarded for encouraging an invasion.
 
While I may not mind that much that people are illegally here, your not going to get an accurate assessment of if they are going to stay here permanently.

A lot of the legal/illegal immigrants are here to make some scratch and go home to build a house.
It wouldn't be fair to give that state a temporary 10 year boost in funding just because of that.
 
Last edited:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...s-us-citizenship-question.html#post1058349639

The 14th Amendment:

 
Let's look at the Preamble:


It says "our posterity".

Just in case some of you are confused, posterity is not the practice of sitting up straight with your knees and ankles together, shoulders parallel to your hips, with your elbows in close.

No, "our posterity" means "our descendants".

The Constitution was not written to protect criminals entering the country illegal or to give them representation in our Congress.

No.

Illegals should not be counted when the apportioning of congressional districts is determined, and that's the sole purpose of the Census.
 
the makeout hobo said:
Yes. It says to count them.
Click to expand...

Really??

There's a clause in the Constitution that commands the counting of invading hordes of aliens?

Got any clue why illegal aliens are called "illegal aliens"? It's because they broke laws to get here. They're criminals.

The only valid reason to count them would be to find them, round them up, and ship them out. Since they have no right to be here, they should not be counted to influence to distribution of Congressmen among the states.

Since they are not supposed to be here, since they are here illegally, explain why they should be given representation.
 
Hatuey said:
....we don't count natives?
Click to expand...

We didn't used to, but ever since we started taxing all of them back in the 30's, they've been counted just like everyone else. Nowadays, the census covers absolutely everyone.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Let's look at the Preamble

Illegals should not be counted when the apportioning of congressional districts is determined, and that's the sole purpose of the Census.
Click to expand...

Good point, your amateur analysis of an unrelated portion of the Constitution is more compelling than the actual words of the directly related portion of the constitution.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Really??

There's a clause in the Constitution that commands the counting of invading hordes of aliens
Click to expand...

14thamendmentfail
 
RightinNYC said:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...s-us-citizenship-question.html#post1058349639

The 14th Amendment:
Click to expand...

You are aware that the 14th Amendment is the poorly worded Amendment that created the "Anchor Baby", aren't you?

The presumption made in that Amendment was that the persons were in the country legally.

No one in their right mind....especially not the white guys that won the civil war, would expect that people would allow their country to be overrun by aliens violating all laws and then count those invaders to determine the apportionment of Congress.

Just like they phrased what become the Anchor Baby law merely to stop Southern Democrats from claiming the sons of former slaves were not citizens and hence ineligible to vote. Under no circumstances can anyone honestly argue that the Anchor Baby rule was intended by the authors of this Amendment to mean a knocked up invader could sneak into the country and drop a baby and then be exempt from deportation.

How about if you people name a good reason why they should be counted, since the Constituiton doesn't support you?
 
RightinNYC said:
Good point, your amateur analysis of an unrelated portion of the Constitution is more compelling than the actual words of the directly related portion of the constitution.
Click to expand...

Yes, clearly the portion of the Constitution that states WHY we have the Constitution is completely unrelated to everything in the document. Why, if we kept in mind what the Constitution is for, by reading the Preamble, we might not forget that the Constitution is about protecting OUR freedoms, not an excuse to provide any service anyone could want at taxpayer expense.

We might start to think the Constitution and thus the government exist to protect us, not rob us, to ensure our freedoms, not our slave chains.

Damn, yes, you people better get an Amendment passed right away eliminating the Preamble, since it's causing you people so many problems.

RightinNYC said:
14thamendmentfail
Click to expand...

Yes, your mindless citing of the 14th without making the least attempt to understand it is indicative of the general robotic failure of all the people who hate America.
 

Poorly worded because you disagree with those portions of it.
 
Partisan said:
Yes, so they can locate them & deport them.....
Click to expand...

Good asnwer!

But the idea that illegals shoud be represented in Congress (by their affecting congressional apportionments) is gravely inane, and so they should NOT be counted.
 
Goobieman said:
Good asnwer!

But the idea that illegals shoud be represented in Congress (by their affecting congressional apportionments) is gravely inane, and so they should NOT be counted.
Click to expand...

Then amend the Constitution.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
You are aware that the 14th Amendment is the poorly worded Amendment that created the "Anchor Baby", aren't you?
Click to expand...

You are aware that neither I nor the courts give two ****s about whether you think it's poorly worded, aren't you?

It is what it is. Don't like it, get it changed.

The presumption made in that Amendment was that the persons were in the country legally.
Click to expand...

Link? Give me some primary documents that indicate that's what they were thinking.

How about if you people name a good reason why they should be counted, since the Constituiton doesn't support you?
Click to expand...

This would be impressive if it weren't so absurd.

Law: "Ice cream is banned"
Me: "Like the law says, we shouldn't be eating ice cream."
You: "That's obviously not what the law means, when they passed it they were really thinking about iced cream, like if you took those little cream packets from McDonalds and froze them and threw them at cars. They banned that because its dangerous.
Me: "No, the law says 'ice cream is banned'"
You "How about you name a good reason that ice cream should be banned, since the law doesn't agree."

I don't have to name a good reason why they should be counted. The Constitution says so. /thread
 
Well, the reason not to count them is because they shouldn't be represented. When determining how many districts a state should have, that could be an issue.

However, there are also reasons to count them:

1. The census counts people in the US. They are people. They are in the US.

2. The census also counts legal immigrants -- people who have green cards and are here legally but still cannot vote. For that matter, it counts children and prisoners who can't vote either.

3. States and localities that have illegal immigrants have expenses related to that, and since some federal funding is based on the population they could use that money. If there are costs associated with having 1,000,000 in your district, those costs aren't necessarily lower because 100,000 of them are illegally here.

So I kind of see both sides here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…