Birthright Citizenship Causes Illegal Immigration

"Blood that has soaked into the sands of a beach is all of one color. America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''
hahaha…your FEELZ are cute…Fuck it, post our immigration policy written by Emma Lazarus while your stooping way the fuck down there FEELZ guy.
No U.S. President has fucked over American citizens like Reagan’s nutless bipartisan ass did. Fuck that piece of filthy dogshit. No Amnesty Bill = no 20-50 million wetbacks
 
"Blood that has soaked into the sands of a beach is all of one color. America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''
.
 
I think it is time to put an end to all immigration. At 330 million we are full. Don't need any more.

Only have immigration to accommodate legitimate marriages and adoption. Maybe a few hundred slots to allow real high earners to come in.


We need to deport about 140 million. That will go a long way to helping all the 'environmentalists' meet all those demands for reduced consumption and pollution as well, a win-win.
 
"Blood that has soaked into the sands of a beach is all of one color. America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''
.
 
"Blood that has soaked into the sands of a beach is all of one color. America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''
.
 
"Blood that has soaked into the sands of a beach is all of one color. America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''
hahaha…your FEELZ are cute…Fuck it, post our immigration policy written by Emma Lazarus while your stooping way the fuck down there FEELZ guy.
No U.S. President has fucked over American citizens like Reagan’s nutless bipartisan ass did. Fuck that piece of filthy dogshit. No Amnesty Bill = no 20-50 million parasitic wetbacks.
 
"Blood that has soaked into the sands of a beach is all of one color. America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''
.
 
Sure, I get that. I just mean what is the reasoning for birthright citizenship, why should we want it as a policy?
dblack sorry, late reply but:

The short answer is economics.

The better question in my mind would be why we want to limit it. It is, after all, a limitation on free movement and free association. There are good reasons to do so such as maintaining culture and limiting the disruption that immigration naturally brings with it. However, those negatives only come about if we are allowing to much immigration to fast and I see no indication whatsoever that we are at that level.

As far as why we would want it, basic economics. Labor is a commodity and it is by far the most valuable you can have in any nation. Immigration does increase our economic success as virtually every single study on the matter seems to conclude.

I would, of course, prefer changing the system so that we have an immigration policy that is more in line with our economic needs and geared at brining in more capable individuals BUT no one banging on about immigration or a single bill ever introduced is actually trying to replace our non-existent immigration system. Instead it is only about stopping immigration rather than putting a reasonable and effective program in place.

I would support ending birthright citizenship (with the proper channels as it IS in the constitution) if those putting it fourth actually were serious and had a real immigration program with real goals in mind. Unfortunately, that represents, essentially, no one.
 
dblack sorry, late reply but:

The short answer is economics.

The better question in my mind would be why we want to limit it. It is, after all, a limitation on free movement and free association. There are good reasons to do so such as maintaining culture and limiting the disruption that immigration naturally brings with it. However, those negatives only come about if we are allowing to much immigration to fast and I see no indication whatsoever that we are at that level.

As far as why we would want it, basic economics. Labor is a commodity and it is by far the most valuable you can have in any nation. Immigration does increase our economic success as virtually every single study on the matter seems to conclude.

I would, of course, prefer changing the system so that we have an immigration policy that is more in line with our economic needs and geared at brining in more capable individuals BUT no one banging on about immigration or a single bill ever introduced is actually trying to replace our non-existent immigration system. Instead it is only about stopping immigration rather than putting a reasonable and effective program in place.

I would support ending birthright citizenship (with the proper channels as it IS in the constitution) if those putting it fourth actually were serious and had a real immigration program with real goals in mind. Unfortunately, that represents, essentially, no one.
Yeah - I'm not at all interested in limiting immigration, or building a wall, or any of that. In fact, my thought that is that without birthright citizenship, moving toward more liberal immigrations policies would be an easier sell.
 
I've read the entire Constitution and it's amendments. The 14th amendment is the most abused amendment of all because the wording was not specific enough. We did not have a bloated Federal government with massive social service programs in 1866. You have to examine the context of the time in which the amendment was written, they didn't have a crystal ball seeing hundreds of thousands of desperate people pouring into the country TAKING RESOURCES AWAY from poor American citizens. Birthright citizenship was never intended to be a carrot to entice these people to endanger themselves entering the country illegally.
And since they didn't have a crystal to predict the future -- that means you Conservatives need to get an amendment passed and get it ratified by the states......



Right now, the main pressing matters the GOP is willing to face is whining about trans people and Hunter's dick pics....so it's not looking too good for that 28th amendment
 
Yeah - I'm not at all interested in limiting immigration, or building a wall, or any of that. In fact, my thought that is that without birthright citizenship, moving toward more liberal immigrations policies would be an easier sell.
I doubt it. What makes you think that?

Take one look at the right and ask yourself what their motivations are - the underlying reasons they oppose birthright citizenship. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the people that are immigrating. It has everything to do with isolationism. Removing the current system will do absolutely nothing to move anyone over to a better immigration system.
 
I doubt it. What makes you think that?

Take one look at the right and ask yourself what their motivations are - the underlying reasons they oppose birthright citizenship. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the people that are immigrating. It has everything to do with isolationism. Removing the current system will do absolutely nothing to move anyone over to a better immigration system.
I suppose you're right. But if it was part of a quid pro quo, if ending birthright citizenship was part of a package deal that also streamlined legal immigration in a sane way, i could support that.
 
And since they didn't have a crystal to predict the future -- that means you Conservatives need to get an amendment passed and get it ratified by the states......



Right now, the main pressing matters the GOP is willing to face is whining about trans people and Hunter's dick pics....so it's not looking too good for that 28th amendment
The discussion is about birthright citizenship being an attractor for illegal immigration. I haven't heard one of you Democrats deny that it is. Illegal immigration is a massive problem that has to be attacked at multiple levels. Building a wall, or floating balls in the river or restarting Title 42 isn't going to fix it.

Amending the Constitution with the Democrats hell bent on bringing in as many illegals as possible? GMAFB.
 
And since they didn't have a crystal to predict the future -- that means you Conservatives need to get an amendment passed and get it ratified by the states......

Right now, the main pressing matters the GOP is willing to face is whining about trans people and Hunter's dick pics....so it's not looking too good for that 28th amendment

Look at the 15th amendment.
 

Forum List

Back
Top