- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Poll: For or against birthright citizenship?
Posted on 10/30/18 at 1:46 pm to bhtigerfan
Posted on 10/30/18 at 1:46 pm to bhtigerfan
The way it is being applied is not what the original intent was for the law when it was put in place.
0
Posted on 10/30/18 at 1:52 pm to lsufanz
quote:
Thankfully, we have their actual intent in quotes from the time, so we don't have to argue over "what the meaning of is is"
We have the Confederate States reasons for succession in actual documents ,but it doesn't deter the Neo Confederates from disputing it was about slavery.
This post was edited on 10/30/18 at 1:55 pm
Posted on 10/30/18 at 2:13 pm to sugar71
quote:
sugar71
Our very own racist. Do you ever post any subject matter that doesn’t carry race baiting overtones?
What a racist POS.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 2:22 pm to bhtigerfan
Against...
A least one parent must be American citizen, or both in legal process of acquiring legal citizenship at time of child’s birth....child can then receive citizenship when parents are granted such right.
A least one parent must be American citizen, or both in legal process of acquiring legal citizenship at time of child’s birth....child can then receive citizenship when parents are granted such right.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:04 pm to bhtigerfan
quote:For in all cases of legal residency.
Poll: For or against birthright citizenship?
For or against and explain why.
Against in cases of nonresidency birth tourism and nonlegal residency.
The "birthright" question is one of control and purpose.
So what is the intent of the birthright provision?
The intent is that there is some expected loyalty, patriotism, etc. conferred to an individual who is born here.
Given that premise, do we want an ISIS terrorist's pregnant concubine hopping a flight here, hiding out a month or two, and dropping a kid on US soil? Then immediately carting the new US "citizen" back to a life of indoctrination in Middle East terrorist camps for 25 years. At that point the citizen-terrorist returns here to do his thing. Such a disconnect to US roots is exactly why the founding fathers insisted any POTUS be naturally born.
Same thesis applies to Chinese birth tourism where a pregnant Chinese mother comes to the US, gives birth here, takes the baby back to China. 18 yrs later the "US citizen", a loyal Chinese Communist, returns with all rights to attend a US university, and partake of all US advantages, albeit with no inherent loyalty to the US whatsoever. Unlike Arnold Schwarzenegger or Jennifer Granholm, both the terrorist and the Chi-Com would, by this definition of "birthright citizenship", be eligible to run for the US Presidency.
Neither of those scenarios make any sense in terms of birthright loyalties.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:05 pm to bhtigerfan
Against bc it's going to lead to more Dem voters, thus Socialism.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:06 pm to bhtigerfan
Against. It was necessary at the time due to the citizenship-limbo newly emancipated slaves were in after the Civil War due to Dredd Scott. Its not longer useful or necessary.
But I don't think you are getting rid of it without a Constitutional Amendment.
But I don't think you are getting rid of it without a Constitutional Amendment.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:07 pm to bhtigerfan
It was a necessity when it was first introduced, so that freed slaves couldn't immediately be deemed as non-citizens and have their rights stripped away.
It hasn't been necessary for a very long time though.
It hasn't been necessary for a very long time though.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:14 pm to Tractor Tug60
quote:
Our very own racist. Do you ever post any subject matter that doesn’t carry race baiting overtones?
What a racist POS.
I'm not the one attempting to circumvent the 14th because of fear of those Brown 'invaders'.
My point is that this board may not be qualified to honestly interpret the words of others from the past.
I d prefer you vent your nasty anger here than lash out like the Right wing Magabomber and Synagogue shooter. Let it out.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:16 pm to sugar71
quote:
I'm not the one attempting to circumvent the 14th because of fear of those Brown 'invaders'.
I don't think some blonde haired, blue eyed Scandinavian born here should get citizenship either
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:17 pm to sugar71
quote:In actuality that is exactly what you are attempting.
I'm not the one attempting to circumvent the 14th because of those Brown 'invaders'.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:27 pm to bhtigerfan
Against
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:30 pm to sugar71
quote:
I'm not the one attempting to circumvent the 14th because of fear of those Brown 'invaders'.
The law is being circumvented by allowing illegal citizens to enter this country and they are certainly not allowed to have their children become citizens.
I like how you keep calling these people "brown people". Shows your true colors and racism.
Eta: I also think its ignorant of you that you're utterly incapable of distinguishing between the character among who you call "brown people".
Educated & civilized law abiding brown people are always and have always been welcomed into the United States.
This post was edited on 10/30/18 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:45 pm to TexasTiger89
quote:From another thread:
Poll: For or against birthright citizenship?
Against
As with other leftist narratives, nomenclature and semantics are very important.
So in that vein, let's be clear . . .
No one is proposing to end birthright citizenship.
No one is "against" birthright citizenship.
=======
What you are against is foreigners in illegal residence having legal right to confer birthright citizenship.
Sounds like a silly technicality, but it isn't.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:48 pm to NC_Tigah
(Clap)
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:48 pm to sugar71
quote:
I'm not the one attempting to circumvent the 14th because of fear of those Brown 'invaders'.
My point is that this board may not be qualified to honestly interpret the words of others from the past.
What is a substantive reason for continuing the practicing of allowing a pregnant person to cross the border, give birth, and granting their offspring citizenship?
Posted on 10/30/18 at 3:54 pm to bhtigerfan
Against for illegals. Again, Common Sense!
Posted on 10/30/18 at 4:07 pm to bhtigerfan
Against. Because a tourist from a foreign country could have a baby while visiting Disneyland, and that child would automatically be a US citizen. That's stupid.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 4:10 pm to bhtigerfan
For. It's part of the constitution. You can't take a part out of the ammendment you don't like. You have to get an ammendment to repeal the 14th.
Good luck getting ANYTHING like that out of the sad circus that Congress has become.
Good luck getting ANYTHING like that out of the sad circus that Congress has become.
Posted on 10/30/18 at 4:10 pm to DaGarun
quote:
Against, because it seems to be the stupidest of all ways to determine nationality
Against
9 out of 10 countries do their citizenship by blood, not by soil.
Technically, the Supreme court may actually find against Citizenship for children born to illegal aliens as unconstitutional.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News