New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: We've recently made changes to our user database and have removed inactive and spam users. If you can not login, please re-register.

#1 2017-02-18 16:38:41

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Erroding birthright citizenship

All part of turning a Drivers or Non-Driver License into a Positive Real ID card. https://www.dhs.gov/real-id-public-faqs

Real ID rollout creates turmoil at NH DMV with the customers not realizing the level of documentation needed to enter the program until after they have waited in line to speak with a customer representative.

Type of proof required at the counter is provide proof of identity, such as an original or certified copy of your birth certificate, a Social Security number on a valid Social Security card; and two forms of proof of New Hampshire residency, including a valild, non-expired NH driver's license and property tax or utility bill for the current address provided.

http://www.nhliberty.org/nh_law_vs_real_id

The states that have turned this into a voter identification card are using it to identify those that are here illegally or can not get the proper identification required to gain a real ID. Since this is nothing more than a hackable data base to steal identifies from you can now opt out to not having the data retain your SSN, Photograph and more....

Offline

#2 2017-02-20 13:39:29

RobertDyck
Member
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,519
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Currently the majority of illegal immigrants to the United States are Latino. Statistics clearly show the number of criminals per thousand population is far lower than citizens born in America. To say all illegal immigrants are criminals are repeating a lie. And it's insulting.

Furthermore, illegal immigrants are hired to do the dirty jobs that Americans don't want to do. You complain they're taking jobs from Americans? Are you willing to pick produce from farm fields, from sunrise to sunset, and receive less than minimum wage, no benefits, no work-place safety protection, etc? Are you willing to work as a maid for some rich person, scrubbing their toilets? If you aren't willing to do shit jobs at less than minimum wage, then stop complaining.

America was founded on cheap slave labour. When slavery was abolished, illegal immigrants were used instead.

As for Trump's immigration ban; the problem is he said this is from "Muslim" countries. Not terrorist countries or countries engaged in military conflict with the United States. He said "Muslim". By doing so he's falling into the trap of terrorist leaders. In the 1990s Osama bin Laden tried to issue a fatwa to all Muslims, to attack all foreign soldiers in "Muslim land". But he was just a businessman, paid to train terrorists. He didn't have credentials within the Muslim faith to issue a fatwa. The Muslim leader who did said "No!" So anyone of the Muslim faith who follows that so-called "fatwa" are actually violating their own faith. And there are more people of the Muslim faith than Christians in the world. So starting a religious war is a very bad idea. This isn't about religion, it's about a few power hungry assholes trying to use religion to trick citizens into becoming their cannon fodder.

Offline

#3 2017-03-11 21:24:25

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

FBI Director James Comey Says NO, FBI Did Not Wire Tap Trump ...FBI Director Comey asked Justice officials to refute Trump's ...White House counsel seeking access to FISA order that ...Comey asks subordinates to ID who had access to FISA info ...Comey launches internal investigation for potential abuser of FISA warrants. The potential for rogue FBI agents. Keep in mind that it’s not unheard of for an FBI agent to really be CIA plant. How then could Trump, Clapper, and Comey all be right about ‘wiretapping’ Trump Tower?
This may be possible for the NSA as it doesn’t need a FISA warrant to target the Russian banks – or any other foreign entity connected with those banks, or doing business in Trump Tower. Sounds a little like Snowden does it not...

Trump Lawsuit Can Go Forward After Supreme Court Of Canada Ruling plaintiffs — Sarbjit Singh and Se Na Lee — allege they were sold units in the hotel under false pretenses and misled to believe their investments would result in returns ranging from 7.74 per cent to 20.90 per cent. Instead, the two investors lost a combined $1.2 million, according to a decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal last year.

Texas Republicans drew congressional districts on racial lines Map found to be gerrymandered to weaken growing voting power of minorities, giving Democrats hope of new maps that could turn over more seats in Congress. Judges noted the “strong racial tension and heated debate about Latinos, Spanish-speaking people, undocumented immigrants and sanctuary cities” that served as the backdrop in the legislature to Texas adopting the maps and the voter ID law. 'Born and raised' Texans forced to prove identities under new voter ID law.

e7643d95-1237-4fd7-95d6-168c31e14778-2060x1236.jpeg?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=88bf4fee2e9c1542a64f9b896a3d9ce5

He voted again for Obama in 2012, and turned out for the 2010 midterm elections in between. But this year is different. Kennie is one of an estimated 600,000 Texans who, though registered to vote, will be unable to do so because they cannot meet photo-identification requirements set out in the state’s new voter-ID law, SB14 .

Wisconsin's new voter ID law could keep me from voting at age 87, I’ve been registered to vote since 1948. At 85 years old, I didn’t have one, because I’m handicapped and so I never drove a car or needed an ID. The newspaper said that I’d have to go to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and register for a card, and it had a list of the documents that I needed to bring. I hadeverything – except for the legal birth certificate. I’m not sure my parents ever gave that to me. I did have a baptism certificate that was notarized, but that was all.

The aura of lawlessness around Trump is a struggle for us all – emboldened the courts in US immigration policy – as demonstrated by legal fights unfolding in the wake of Trump’s latest order. So what does he have session do is to tell all AG's left from the Obama resign.....

Offline

#4 2017-07-30 10:31:41

RobertDyck
Member
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,519
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Canada requires voter ID. But there are many types of ID accepted.
Elections Canada: ID to vote

1) Show one of these pieces of ID

    your driver's licence
    your provincial or territorial ID card
    any other government card with your photo, name and current address

You can use ID with your mailing address if that address appears in your voter registration file. If you're not sure what address we have on file, check your voter registration.

or


2) Show two pieces of ID

At least one must have your current address

    health card
    Canadian passport
    birth certificate
    certificate of Canadian citizenship
    citizenship card
    social insurance number card
    Indian status card
    band membership card
    Métis card
    card issued by an Inuit local authority
    Canadian Forces identity card
    Veterans Affairs health card
    old age security card
    hospital card
    medical clinic card
    label on a prescription container
    identity bracelet issued by a hospital or long-term care facility
    blood donor card
    CNIB card
    credit card
    debit card
    employee card
    student identity card
    public transportation card
    library card
    liquor identity card
    parolee card
    firearms licence
    licence or card issued for fishing, trapping or hunting
    utility bill (e.g. electricity; water; telecommunications services including telephone, cable or satellite)
    bank statement
    credit union statement
    credit card statement
    personal cheque
    government statement of benefits
    government cheque or cheque stub
    pension plan statement
    residential lease or sub-lease
    mortgage contract or statement
    income tax assessment
    property tax assessment or evaluation
    vehicle ownership
    insurance certificate, policy or statement
    correspondence issued by a school, college or university
    letter from a public curator, public guardian or public trustee
    targeted revision form from Elections Canada to residents of long-term care facilities
    letter of confirmation of residence from a First Nations band or reserve or an Inuit local authority
    letter of confirmation of residence, letter of stay, admission form or statement of benefits from one of the following designated establishments:
        student residence
        seniors' residence
        long-term care facility
        shelter
        soup kitchen

We accept e-statements and e-invoices. Print them or show them on a mobile device.

or

3) If your ID does not have your current address, take an oath

Show two pieces of ID with your name and have someone who knows you attest to your address. This person must show proof of identity and address, be registered in the same polling division, and attest for only one person.

Offline

#5 2017-08-29 15:09:37

jburk
Webmaster
From: Seattle, WA
Registered: 2011-11-17
Posts: 144
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

RobDyck wrote:
"every president of the US from George Washington until Abraham Lincoln was a Southerner. Lincoln was the first Northern president."

John Adams was born in New England (MA).
Martin Van Buren was born in New York.
Millard Fillmore was born in New York.
Franklin Pierce was born in New Hampshire and was considered a "Northern Democrat".
James Buchanan was from Pennsylvania.

But you make some other good points about the people that are against white supremecists being just as bad and just as prejudiced and judgemental.  I find it all hard to watch sometimes.

Also I agree about giving proper respect to the South.  Even though they lost the Civil War (or as most Southerners call it more accurately, "The War Between The States"), they hold a place in American history.  Most young people today know less about history & geography than my generation (Gen X) when we were their age, and I thought my generation was terrible about those.  Overall, Americans should be more respectful of each other and our differences of opinion, including and especially being respectful of others who we disagree with. 

"I don't agree with you but I would die for you to have the right to express your opinion."  -- Because a lot of people already have.  Living in a free and open society is not a birthright, you have to work at it.  Ask the people that lived in Nazi Germany.


James Burk | Webmaster & IT Director | The Mars Society
jburk@marssociety.org  |  +1 (206) 601-7143

Offline

#6 2017-12-14 15:27:28

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,221

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

SpaceNut,

People "at the bottom" normally receive jobs from people "at the top", don't they?  I pay a maid to clean our house because my free time is worth more to me than what I pay her, but I can only afford to do that because of my high salary.  If I eventually have to pay enough in taxes that I can't afford her services, then I'll stop using her services and clean the house myself.  If the people at the top make more money by bringing their money back to America and hiring people to make them more money, rather than parking it off-shore and waiting for better times, then that should help the people at the bottom land higher paying jobs.  Working at McDonald's is not supposed to be a career choice, either, unless you're the manager.

Stop lusting after the money of the rich man.  Think and grow rich yourself.  If you've been a basket weaver for a decade and can't make more money weaving baskets, then start looking into a different line of business.  That's what thinking people who don't complain about how hard life is would do if they want more money.  Do you think Elon Musk got to where he is today by sticking his thumb up his butt and relying on someone else to pay him?  Big rewards require big risks and they don't always pay off.  That's life.

Smart people pay once for knowledge and then apply it.  Ignorant people never learn to begin with and end up paying again and again and again when they refuse to learn.  Everyone must decide for themselves which model works best for them, but I can tell you that the first model has worked best for me and will probably work well for other people, too.

Real Life Examples:

I pay a plumber once to learn how to do a job, then the next time something breaks I fix it myself.  This has literally saved thousands of dollars and I don't have to wait to repair a leaky faucet, toilet, shower, or unclog a drain, and none of my repairs have ever failed in a span of years.

When someone broke three of the four door handles on my wife's Tahoe to steal her purse, I replaced all of the broken door handles and lock myself using information from a YouTube video and some guidance from the dealer.  It took me all Saturday and two trips to the dealership for more parts, but it saved hundreds of dollars in labor and if it ever happens again, I know how to fix it.  $150 worth of parts and a screwdriver vs $700 (substantially more than the monthly loan payment) that the dealership quoted to fix it.  You do the math.  I still pay a pro to paint a part because I can't do that properly for less money, but I'll install it myself.

Learn or be punished for your ignorance.  That's a life lesson right there.  A lifetime of learning makes people wealthy, not happenstance of birth, where they're from, or who they know.  All those things certainly help, but only when you learn.  There are lots of former rich people who lost everything because they were ignorant.  You think you can take enough from other to generate prosperity for all or that somehow they "stole" from others.  Maybe some did, probably very few given the number of laws and severity of the penalties we have regarding theft, but most made money by learning and then applying what they know.

Why do liberals and people who vote for liberals constantly require more of other people's money to support their ideas about how things should work?  I don't get the sense that all the money in the world would satisfy their "needs" ("wants") and quite frankly, we don't have even a considerable fraction of what's required for their ideas to work.  Anyway, I'd really like to know the answer to that question.

Offline

#7 2018-03-13 21:02:48

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,221

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

SpaceNut,

I've been required to provide my birth certificate, driver's license, and social security number at every job I've ever had.  If you're not legally permitted to work in the US, then how are you supposed to provide for yourself when you become an adult?

Offline

#8 2018-03-13 21:43:13

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

I have only had to give a drivers license and some other proof on legal residence

https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/accep … -documents

https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/working-us

https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/employm … n-document

http://www.dshs.texas.gov/vs/faq/birth.shtm

Unassisted home birth is not illegal in any state – and there are no laws protecting your right to have an unassisted birth, either. It's sort of in a “gray area” of the law.

http://www.mothering.com/forum/306-unas … icate.html

Getting a Birth Certificate for a Home Birth

U.S. STANDARD CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH form REV. 11/2003

Offline

#9 2018-03-28 19:09:07

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

U.S. citizens under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution
lawsuit filed Tuesday on behalf of American Samoans in Utah  Residents of US territory American Samoa sue for citizenship

American Samoa, a U.S. territory since 1900, is a cluster of islands 2,600 miles (4,184 kilometers) southwest of Hawaii perpetually stuck in a legal loophole. People born in the territory are labeled U.S. nationals. Under that status, they cannot vote, run for office, sponsor family members for immigration to the U.S., apply for certain government jobs, or serve on a jury -- despite paying taxes to Uncle Sam. They're even issued special U.S. passports that say: "This bearer is a United States national and not a United States citizen."

Congress has decided on a per territory basis to allow those born in Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands to claim citizenship by birth. American Samoa's population of about 55,000, however, has continued to fall to the wayside.

How can that be as other territories are citizens and not Nationals?

A previous case he led stalled in 2016 when the Supreme Court declined to reconsider a ruling from a lower court in D.C., which found the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship didn't apply to American Samoa, and referred back to controversial colonial era decisions from the early 20th century after the U.S. acquired a spate of territories in the Spanish American War.

Known as the "Insular Cases," the Supreme Court distinguished between "incorporated" and "unincorporated" territories. The former, such as Arizona and New Mexico, mostly settled by white people, were thought destined to be a permanent part of the U.S. The latter, such as American Samoa, weren't considered candidates for statehood, whose inhabitants were described as "alien races" and "uncivilized," and thus weren't granted full constitutional rights.

No wonder we are having issues with people getting visa's if that is the way we are still labelling nations....

Offline

#10 2018-04-28 14:37:31

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

The way that weapon control is going we will soon have baseball bats, hockey sticks ect... included in that list... The issue with guns is 2 fold in that some are lgally gotten and some not so much and the crimes that are committed are coming form both. While regulating the legal to select weapon types is good its the unlawful giving of the weapon, stolen weapons that are putting the hands that do not belong having one all the ability to kill in additional to all the not so legal percurement to geting one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthrigh … ted_States

The policy stems from the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The 1868 text states, "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."

To which the legal definition has been a moving target of content of situation adding to that law.

3 Things You Should Know About Birthright Citizenship

The issue of citizenship was brought into focus by a Supreme Court ruling in 1857 that essentially declared that blacks — even the daughters and sons of freed slaves — were not U.S. citizens.

Of course the new fight seems to be trying to recend the right that was granted to those which were otherwise protected... Is it possible to end birthright citizenship? Which is how Trump is being viewed....

Offline

#11 2018-04-28 15:51:04

Oldfart1939
Member
Registered: 2016-11-26
Posts: 1,561

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

SpaceNut-

The point of contention is, whether birthright citizenship devolves automatically to those here illegally or not. Since I found my Grandpa's Citizenship Naturalization papers, signed by a Federal Magistrate, I am adamantly opposed to simply handing out that great privilege and honor of citizenship of the United States of America.

Offline

#12 2018-04-28 17:12:36

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Immigration and Nationality Act is the process by which U.S. citizenship is granted to a foreign citizen or national after he or she fulfills the requirements established by Congress.

https://www.usa.gov/become-us-citizen

https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/ci … ralization

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturaliz … ct_of_1795

You May Qualify for Naturalization if:

    You have been a permanent resident for at least 5 years and meet all other eligibility requirements, please visit our Path to Citizenship page for more information.
    You have been a permanent resident for 3 years or more and meet all eligibility requirements to file as a spouse of a U.S. citizen, please visit our Naturalization for Spouses of U.S. Citizens page for more information.
    You have qualifying service in the U.S. armed forces and meet all other eligibility requirements. Visit the Military section of our website.
    Your child may qualify for naturalization if you are a U.S. citizen, the child was born outside the U.S., the child is currently residing outside the U.S., and all other eligibility requirements are met. Visit our Citizenship Through Parents page for more information.

I was born on a Naval Base to which I have a Certificate of birth from the navy, A naval birth certificate and a state birth certificate.....And just went through the so called voter ID or real ID for citizenships rights to vote. To which if the documents are worn they can denie the articles of proof for the Drivers or non Drives License real ID....

So just more paper that is to claim I am  citizen....

Offline

#13 2018-06-08 16:38:01

RobertDyck
Member
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,519
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

kbd512 wrote:

Killing your own child after irresponsible sexual conduct and forcing everyone else to pay for your actions is not an American value.

Worded in a very biased way, trying to incite an argument. I have responded to this before. I could repeat the long, detailed explanation, or simply the crucial point. Modern law defines a person to be brain dead when the thinking, reasoning portion of the brain no longer functions. Once brain death occurs, organs can be harvested for transplant. Meaning that person can be literally cut into pieces to give those pieces to others. The body could still breath, its heart beat, and body maintain temperature, functions regulated by the brain stem, but still be ruled to be "brain dead". Various mid-brain structures could still function: cerebellum is responsible for physical coordination, hippocampus controls memory. But the cerebrum is the large portion of the brain on top. All thinking, dreaming, deciding, conscious thought occurs there. When the cerebrum no longer functions, a patient is ruled to be brain dead. Babies are born with their cerebrum not connected together, individual cells are not connected via dendrites and axons. There's a reason: the process of birth squeezes the baby's head so any fine connections would be ripped apart, causing massive brain damage. Human skulls are not formed yet during birth, the cranium is bone that floats on the brain while a baby grows, and connects itself together, moulding the skull to the brain, all after birth. At birth, the baby doesn't have a skull to protect its brain. This means babies are born clinically brain dead. Their "mind" forms soon after birth.

In the 1970s when I first studied this, medical science confirmed the cerebrum started to function 3 months after birth. But medical knowledge was increasing, and later advanced may find the cerebrum functions sooner after birth. But it certainly cannot before birth, because any connections would be ripped apart by the process of birth itself. Modern 21st century science has confirmed cerebrum functioning as soon as 2 weeks after birth. So it is closer to birth than previously thought, but even in the 1970s scientists suspected that, they just didn't have any way to confirm it. But again, that means soon after birth, it cannot be before birth.

This means a fetus isn't a "child", and abortion does not constitute "killing your own child". A fetus is tissue. The fetus becomes a child as soon as he/she is born.

Offline

#14 2018-10-30 17:15:22

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

America has been used by some that cross just to have there child on soverieng soil and these children become functioning citizens for the most part that contribute to america. The parents typically are hard working and bring there childrenn up with the american dream. Yes there are always some bad apples in the batch but thats what deportation and law enforcements of the crime as that is they are for.

Trump has done little other than to say build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.. To which Americans are the one's paying for it.

Deportation does not work, walls are defeated and zero tolerance was just wrong. Now hes got it into trying to change the Constitution via executive order where the Birthright Citizenship that is guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution resides. President Trump's promise to end birthright citizenship by executive order seems to have the approval of one of his biggest fans in Congress.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) announced on Tuesday that he plans to introduce legislation ending birthright citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants on American soil, citing it as a “magnet for illegal immigration.

Lets not forget that when america was born everyone was illegal, that the only sovereign soil was the 13 colonies....

Graham to introduce legislation to end birthright citizenship

What is really being said is that you can only be american citizen when at least one is a legal american citizen in order to become american. But of course Trump wants to remove the ones which do not meet that definition from being legal citizens have already been born and have legal documents of where they were born erased....

Offline

#15 2018-10-30 18:18:14

IanM
Member
From: Chicago
Registered: 2015-12-14
Posts: 253

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

A child becoming a person (legally speaking) isn't a particularly new idea, either. The common law held that a child became a person upon taking his/her first breath, something that was presumably done to counter stillbirths. (On the other hand, abortion was illegal in all 50 states prior to Roe v. Wade, but at least some of the pro-choice talking points have some history.) I've also noticed that opposition to abortion and opposition to contraception tend to go hand in hand (I'm not saying anything about any particular people's opinion of the latter), and I feel that a world without either seems too Handmaid's Tale-y.


The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever. -Paraphrased from Tsiolkovsky

Offline

#16 2018-10-31 04:07:00

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 2,903
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

As I understand it, the Supreme Court has yet to rule on whether birthright citizenship applies to children born to those not legally resident in the United States. It would seem like it from the text, but the SC has made decisions in the past that go against the plain reading of the Constitution...

Sigh. If an amendment had been introduced decades ago to restrict citizenship to children born to citizens or permanent residents - bringing America's laws into accordance with almost every other developed country - it probably would have been ratified. That would be a lot harder to do now, what with the Democrats and their abolish borders madness.


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#17 2018-10-31 08:35:30

GW Johnson
Member
From: McGregor, Texas USA
Registered: 2011-12-04
Posts: 3,237
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Actually,  there have been multiple Supreme Court rulings over the 150+ years since the 14th amendment was ratified not long after the War Between the States.  All of them support birthright citizenship,  regardless of the status of the parents.  A lot of lies about this are being circulated for political gain. 

Birthright citizenship is something we share with 30-something other countries,  too.  We're not at all unique in this policy.  A lot of lies about this are also being circulated for political gain. 

As for Trump's executive order approach to rescinding birthright citizenship,  that's utter BS and warrants impeachment if he actually attempts it,  for trying to subvert the Constitution instead of upholding it,  as he swore to do. 

Amendments are part of the Constitution itself,  and the only way to change it is the amendment process,  as specified in the Constitution.  Proposals require a 2/3 supermajority in both houses of congress,  or 2/3 of the states.  Ratification requires a 3/4 supermajority in both houses of congress,  or 3/4 of the states. 

Period.  End of issue.  The nonsense Trump's lawyers may spout is irrelevant. 

The votes are not there for the Trump-controlled GOP to get such an amendment proposed successfully,  much less ratified.  Thank God for that!

What this is really all about is stoking fears of immigrants to get higher voter turnout to keep control of the House and Senate.  Nothing more than that.  But that fear-stoking tactic about a group made a scapegoat for problems is right out of the Nazi playbook in 1925 Germany. 

7 decades ago,  this country spent much of its treasure and a lot of young lives to wipe that evil credo from the face of the Earth.  And here it is in control of our own government.  I cannot tell you how that enrages me!  There are no words.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2018-10-31 08:42:09)


GW Johnson
McGregor,  Texas

"There is nothing as expensive as a dead crew,  especially one dead from a bad management decision"

Offline

#18 2018-10-31 09:50:42

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 2,903
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

The votes are not there for the Trump-controlled GOP to get such an amendment proposed successfully,  much less ratified.  Thank God for that!

Now you really are going for madhouse politics, GW. Restricting citizenship to the children of legal residents is done by the vast majority of countries on the planet. It's not a 'far-right' idea, and if the Democrats weren't batshit insane, they'd reach across the isle and help such an amendment get passed. Canada and the USA are the only developed countries that offer citizenship to anyone who happens to be born on their territory. The much-vaunted Nordic social democracies don't. Britain doesn't. Japan certainly doesn't. It's time for America to catch up with the rest of the civilised world.

Last edited by Terraformer (2018-10-31 09:52:31)


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#19 2018-10-31 16:15:48

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,221

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Terraformer,

If the social democracies of Europe that the Democrats say they want to emulate don't permit illegal aliens to pop out kids on their soil and have those children declared citizens, then I would think such policies should receive the backing of the Democrat Party.  However, this is just another thinly disguised attempt to obtain more Democrat voters using people who would otherwise be ineligible illegal aliens for the purpose.  The Democrats support policies that are plainly not in keeping with the best interests of their own voters.

The globalists in this New Democratic Party want to import foreign labor to continue to depress the wages of American workers, or prevent companies from employing American workers at living wages entirely, then blame the resultant situation on corporate greed or whatever other absurdity they manufacture for that purpose.  They either lack a grasp of basic economics principles regarding what happens in a market with an over-abundance of labor or they know exactly what they're doing and they're intentionally hurting American workers to maintain their grip on political power.  Either way, that's bad news for American workers.

Nobody here wants to debate the simple economics of such policies because they either don't understand or wish to remain ignorant for partisan political purposes.  "Economics in One Lesson" by Henry Hazlitt thoroughly debunks the "broken window" fallacy, the "limited pie" fallacy, and numerous other fallacies that history and mathematics don't support.  It's a short book that's freely available online for anyone who wishes to learn.

Here it is again (I've posted it before):

Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt

Skip to the last chapter, "The Lesson Restated", and read it first.  Then read the rest of the book.

Too many people in this country, no matter their political views, engage in what psychology define as "magical thinking".  Magical thinking ideas range from the idea that people who have nothing will come into this country and contribute more to the economy than they extract, all actual evidence to the contrary, to the zero sum economics fallacy, to the idea that spending money with reckless abandon is a good thing when the government spends it on programs they agree with.  My personal favorite is the idea that taxing rich people more will solve our economics problems.  We could take everything they own, but we can only do it once, then they are no more wealthy than anyone else, all of their combined wealth still wouldn't fund the government through 1 month of operations, and then there's nothing more to take.  It's the "cook the golden goose" fallacy.  We can only eat those golden geese once.  Such ideas are both ignorant of the basic math involved and not intellectually curious enough to determine how well their ideas have worked in the past.  That's why all the arguments offered are pseudo-intellectual (arguments that don't withstand cursory scrutiny) or emotional arguments, because the math is exceptionally clear.

It's impossible to have an intelligent debate without an educated audience.  Therefore, read the book.  Ponder on or discard the knowledge contained therein, but afterwards you'll understand my conservative political views on these matters.  For me, it's about basic math and logic.

Bonus for Trump Haters: It provides ammunition for your arguments about why President Trump's tariffs are bad.  It also provides an explanation about what President Trump hopes to achieve with the tariffs (abolishing tariffs on American goods in foreign markets and, more generally, abolishing protectionist tariffs imposed by foreign markets so that the all workers have to compete on the global stage).  The way he's going about it is not the best way, but if it causes all parties involved to drop the tariffs then, "mission accomplished".  I sincerely hope a Wharton School graduate has read and understands Hazlitt.

Offline

#20 2018-10-31 17:01:58

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Reply on tariff will be in its topic.....

The birth certificate used to identify those born in the US is a modern developement party with regards to census...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_cer … ted_States

The federal and state governments have traditionally cooperated to some extent to improve vital statistics. From 1900 to 1946 the U.S. Census Bureau designed standard birth certificates, collected vital statistics on a national basis, and generally sought to improve the accuracy of vital statistics. In 1946 that responsibility was passed to the U.S. Public Health Service.

The case has been ruled on and the supreme court does not revisit there own rulings.

The Supreme Court Case, That Dooms Trump’s Citizenship Plan

United States v. Wong Kim Ark 1898 ruling....

Offline

#21 2018-10-31 17:13:46

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 2,903
Website

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Not really. Wong Kim Ark was about the child of *legal* residents. Also, the Supreme Court *does* sometimes revisit it's own rulings.

They could well argue that the intent of the fourteenth amendment was not to grant citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. It would cause a logistical and political nightmare, but there wouldn't be anything stopping the court from making that ruling.


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#22 2018-10-31 17:16:27

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,221

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

SpaceNut,

Text from the link to the Wikipedia article regarding United States v. Wong Kim Ark ruling from your Post #20:

"United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898),[1] is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled 6–2 that a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese nationality who at the time had a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and were carrying on business there but not as employees of the Chinese government, automatically became a U.S. citizen.[2] This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution."

Illegal aliens crossing the border for the express purpose of having a kid in the US, and who don't have permanent domiciles in the US, do not automatically become US citizens.

That was exceptionally easy to debunk using information you provided.

Try again.

Offline

#23 2018-10-31 18:56:59

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

Passports and visa's were the result of ww1 so they had no papers

Offline

#24 2018-10-31 19:45:06

kbd512
Member
Registered: 2015-01-02
Posts: 2,221

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

SpaceNut,

The people crossing our border illegally don't even have permission to visit, much less live here.  For countries with defined borders, which would be all of them the last time I checked, you may not enter those countries without the permission of the host government.  It doesn't work that way.  Nobody can just barge into your house without your permission and say they're visiting.  The same principle is at work at the national level.

Offline

#25 2018-11-04 19:35:11

SpaceNut
Administrator
From: New Hampshire
Registered: 2004-07-22
Posts: 13,356

Re: Erroding birthright citizenship

The Citizenship Clause Means What It Says; The authors of the Fourteenth Amendment were clear that the United States is one nation, with one class of citizens, and that citizenship extends to everyone born here.

Trump would target only American-born children of undocumented immigrants, children of foreigners visiting the U.S. on nonpermanent visas—or the children of any noncitizen.

That said some one did go there and made teh question of "Barron Trump was born in March 2006 and Melania wasn’t a legal citizen until July 2006. So under this executive order, his own son wouldn’t be an American citizen."

Born on US soil to Trump... She married Donald Trump in 2005, So those dumb enough to go for the facebook posting and question should leave it alone....

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB