Birthright Citizenship

[Momto2boys973]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, you said that like 5 times now. We read it.

It still doesn’t make the concept a reality. And I know you used your usual “comeback” of “it’s not the same thing!” when I mentioned Melania being an “anchor baby”, but it’s exactly what that concept is. It doesn’t matter if your child acquired citizenship by birth or by abusing the immigration system later on. What she did is acquire American citizenship and then dragged her family over. If that’s not an “anchor va y”, I don’t know what it is. Especially since we all know, she didn’t really qualify for the kind of visa given to her by any extent of the imagination, but that Donnie pushed for it and bought it for her, last likely with some bribes. That’s not abusing the system?

So why is perfectly fine for your idol to abuse the system for his benefit, but not for others? After all, it’s it illegal to travel while pregnant and if the kid came in American soil, well that’s that. The law says that kid is an American citizen.

The concept of "anchor babies" did not exist when the 14th Amendment was written after the Civil War, mainly to assure former slaves of citizenship. Last year, nearly 300,000 Chinese women came to the U.S. to deliver their babies, and many illegal immigrants use the law as well. Legal immigrants should certainly be granted citizenship for their children, but this law is being abused, and should be addressed in Congress.

[Momto2boys973]

No, it’s not so simple. And that’s why YOU don’t grasp it because you can’t understand beyond “simple”.
You want it put in simpler terms so that you can understand, here it goes, yes or not questions only:

1) A woman is in American soil, perfectly legally, gives birth to a child, she’s not an American citizen, the child is American, yes or no?
2) A woman gives birth to a child abroad, she is an American citizen, the child is an American citizen, yes or no?

Here’s the simple part for you. If you answer “no” to one of these questions, then automatically then other answer is “yes”. You can answer “yes” to both, that perfectly within international law. But you can’t answer “no” to both because that’s a violation of human rights and of signed international treaties by the U.S.

So, that should be simple enough even for you.

So simple, can't even grasp it.

[Della]

So you're okay with birth tourism.

I'm okay with: Don't illegally come into another country pregnant with the intention of dropping your spawn on foreign soil thus granting you free citizenship.

So simple, yet so difficult to process.

So a Chinese woman who's pregnant can intentionally come here near delivery and drop her spawn and you're fine with it because she had a visa.

[morgan]

So you're okay with birth tourism.

I'm okay with: Don't illegally come into another country pregnant with the intention of dropping your spawn on foreign soil thus granting you free citizenship.

So simple, yet so difficult to process.

So a Chinese woman who's pregnant can intentionally come here near delivery and drop her spawn and you're fine with it because she had a visa.

Sure. Now she can go home and take her spawn, or she can take the steps to make herself and her spawn legal. She won't do that though. I wonder why?

[Momto2boys973]

No need to retort to insults. The only one showing massive ignorance of the issues involved around this is YOU.

But as you said, it’s “simple”- for YOU. When you don’t have the mental capacity to see beyond the simple, I can understand it’s frustrating when people start talking about more complex ideas and then all that’s left for you is to insult them, hopefully that’ll shut us up. Because you can’t understand that it’s more complex than what you can grasp.

But that’s not our fault. You don’t need to accuse us of being “criminals” simply because you can’t grasp complexities in an issue that’s really all about emotions and prejudices for you.

I''m so sorry you criminals don't understand the concept of illegal and legal.

[morgan]

LMAO you've been dropping insults at me since I first came back. You were so excited to see me so you could get your nastiness on again. It's cute and sad. I'm off - got shit to do, places to go, people to see. Fun times popping back in. Enjoy your stress.

No need to retort to insults. The only one showing massive ignorance of the issues involved around this is YOU.

But as you said, it’s “simple”- for YOU. When you don’t have the mental capacity to see beyond the simple, I can understand it’s frustrating when people start talking about more complex ideas and then all that’s left for you is to insult them, hopefully that’ll shut us up. Because you can’t understand that it’s more complex than what you can grasp.

But that’s not our fault. You don’t need to accuse us of being “criminals” simply because you can’t grasp complexities in an issue that’s really all about emotions and prejudices for you.

I''m so sorry you criminals don't understand the concept of illegal and legal.

[Momto2boys973]

Because her child has no right not make her an American citizen!!! That’s what I’ve been telling you about “anchor babies” being a myth. You have an American child, that child can do bupkes for you in terms of citizenship and nothing for residence for at least 18 years. And then when he’s an adult, it’s not that simple (I know, that’s a tough one), especially if he hasn’t lived in America. First, he would need residency, so that means living in America for a certain amount of time. Then you have to petition. And finally, that family member may be granted an immigrant visa, which could after a while be turned into a green card or permanent residence, it NOT citizenship, unless they later on go through a whole other process, which is naturalization.

I'm okay with: Don't illegally come into another country pregnant with the intention of dropping your spawn on foreign soil thus granting you free citizenship.

So simple, yet so difficult to process.

So a Chinese woman who's pregnant can intentionally come here near delivery and drop her spawn and you're fine with it because she had a visa.

Sure. Now she can go home and take her spawn, or she can take the steps to make herself and her spawn legal. She won't do that though. I wonder why?

[EarlGrayHot]

That is total bullshit. The Constitution simply says a baby born here is a U.S. CITIZEN! It does NOT say, "unless you are here illegally then your child doesn't count." The phrase, "anchor baby" is an outrageous racist designation. The Constitution means clearly: born here, belong here.

[Momto2boys973]

What name did I call YOU? Please show.
And yes, I knew you would be off now. As I said, you’re trapped in your inconsistent arguments and now prefer to take the high road and jump ship.
Well, I’ll be waiting for your answers to these questions, otherwise we know you’re just full of it and your “opinion” is just a result of you being hateful and prejudicial, as some of us told you on the thread you got locked.

LMAO you've been dropping insults at me since I first came back. You were so excited to see me so you could get your nastiness on again. It's cute and sad. I'm off - got shit to do, places to go, people to see. Fun times popping back in. Enjoy your stress.

No need to retort to insults. The only one showing massive ignorance of the issues involved around this is YOU.

But as you said, it’s “simple”- for YOU. When you don’t have the mental capacity to see beyond the simple, I can understand it’s frustrating when people start talking about more complex ideas and then all that’s left for you is to insult them, hopefully that’ll shut us up. Because you can’t understand that it’s more complex than what you can grasp.

But that’s not our fault. You don’t need to accuse us of being “criminals” simply because you can’t grasp complexities in an issue that’s really all about emotions and prejudices for you.

I''m so sorry you criminals don't understand the concept of illegal and legal.

[Francee89]

The concept of "anchor babies" did not exist when the 14th Amendment was written after the Civil War, mainly to assure former slaves of citizenship. Last year, nearly 300,000 Chinese women came to the U.S. to deliver their babies, and many illegal immigrants use the law as well. Legal immigrants should certainly be granted citizenship for their children, but this law is being abused, and should be addressed in Congress.


In my opinion, if a child is born to a parent who is in the country illegally, (again, I'll repeat - ILLEGALLY) then that child should not get automatic citizenship. The parents needs to take the proper steps to make her/himself, and their child legal.

I'm with Trump. Birthright citizenship in the 21st century is frankly ridiculous.

This is my opinion, and while I can appreciate that my opinion is distasteful to the some of you, that does not make me hateful. It's a difference of political opinion. If you feel the need to call names over a difference of political opinion than you're doing it wrong.

“Addressed in Congress” will require a Constitutional Amendment. Good luck with that.

And it not existing in the time the Constitution was written is pretty strange logic. Social media and instantaneous communication didn’t exist when the First Amendment was written. Many of the wide range of types of firearms available now and the ability to say, do background checks, didn’t exist when the Second Amendment was written. Lethal injection and mass use of solitary confinement in prisons didn’t exist when the Eighth Amendment was written. Just because the writers didn’t imagine how society would evolve hundreds of years later doesn’t somehow change what they say.