It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by TimBrummer
Really? Stripping Americans of their citizenship is NOT a solution to illegal immigration. Fact of the matter is, even if this worked the way you claim it works, that would not solve the "terror anchor baby" situation. Nor would it solve anything at all about illegal immigration. All this would do is cause innocent infants to become criminals through no fault of their own.
Yea, once they get through with this, why not just repeal the 13th Amendment? And re-institute slavery in America? That would be a boon to those that treat us as slaves anyway.
Originally posted by Annee
I agree. Our Founding Fathers had a vision.
It is not something I want to destroy.
It simply does not solve the problem at all to remove everyones citizenship. It just doesn't Even if it wasn't retroactive, the children prior to the repeal of the 14th Amendment would still be considered Americans. Thus, solving nothing.
Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
Ann Durham did not meet citizen requirements as she moved out of country. She had baby Obama at age 18. She did not live the required number if years in the US, according to the laws at the time.
Pathetic
edit on 10-1-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)Lemon.Fresh is $#@$@# idiotedit on 10-1-2011 by Janky Red because: (no reason given)
Well, what about all the ones that have been born here already?
Originally posted by TimBrummer
Originally posted by Annee
I agree. Our Founding Fathers had a vision.
It is not something I want to destroy.
You mean things like Representative Democracy? Majority rule? Over 2/3rds of informed Americans want the immigration laws enforced, and oppose automatic citizenship for illegal alien babies. What happened to no taxation without representation?
Originally posted by Annee
Question: do you think about any ethnicity other then Mexican when you think about immigration laws?
No one ever mentions the illegal Canadians - - of which there are plenty.
Originally posted by Maslo
Jus soli is not needed at all if you have jus sanguis, so that a moot point.
Originally posted by TimBrummer
But Mexicans deserve special attention because there are more Mexican illegal aliens than all other nationalities combined, and because they have officially admitted they are using illegal immigration to re-take political control of the Southwest for the benefit of Mexicans:
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, unless they are anchor babies, Mexicans or some kind of hispanic people, definitely no muslims allowed, and people in general who don’t look similar to me or that talk with some funny accent.
Originally posted by aptness
“Officially admitted”? Did someone, speaking for all Mexicans, whose authority is recognized, in an official capacity, say that “Mexicans should use illegal immigration to re-take political control”?
Originally posted by aptness
I don’t think the Constitution should be changed to address one particular social phenomenon, most likely temporary — unless of course you believe Mexicans will always try to illegally move to the US regardless of the conditions on both countries — when there’s other means to address the problem of illegal immigration.
But, sure, go ahead and try to pass a Constitutional amendment. I’ll even help you with your cause by suggesting what the amendment should say—
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, unless they are anchor babies, Mexicans or some kind of hispanic people, definitely no muslims allowed, and people in general who don’t look similar to me or that talk with some funny accent.
That’s what you propose? We discard completely the jus soli standard?
If we’re going by jus sanguinis, is a child a US citizen at birth, when born abroad to one US citizen parent, but who happens to be a former “anchor baby”? Or that should be an exception as well?
Out of curiosity, in your opinion, should a child born in the United States to legal permanently residing aliens not be a US citizen by virtue of birth?