14th amendment
- Thread starter Canceled2
- Start date
Kamala Trump
Verified User
There's nothing artificial about limiting immigration. It's a core function of government.
In the past more people meant economic growth, but in the new normal, it's just driving the standard of living down and creating a more desperate populace.
But of course, you anti-american globalist fucktards will believe any stupid shit your fascist masters tell you to believe.
In the past more people meant economic growth, but in the new normal, it's just driving the standard of living down and creating a more desperate populace.
But of course, you anti-american globalist fucktards will believe any stupid shit your fascist masters tell you to believe.
hotdog
Victory Shall Be Mine
Does Diversity make america stronger. If their were no muslims in this country would america be any weaker. Would america be any weaker if everyone was of european or african decent? Look at other multicultural societys. Afganistan is really screwed up. A lot of African countries are devided by because of ethnicity and religion. The Austrian Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman empires the minorities never had any loyalty and became back stabbers at the first opportunities. America has successfully elminated a lot of minorities. European people who all hated each other managed to come here a become the white majority. The Irish, English, Scotish, Czechs, Poles, Germans, French, Hungarians, Romanians, Russians, Italians, Dutch ect all very devided in europe managed to unite as one people. People who were considered racially and ethnically different in europe merged to become one group. Do Asians, Mexicans, Blacks as minorities are dangerous. The minority concept is dangerous it makes them feel like outsiders, and volunerable. The White Majority needs to merge with the Mexicans to form one super majority and the blacks need to merge to create a massive Christain majority in America. Muslims can never end their minority status which makes them feel isolated, opressed and un wanted. Since they can't join the majority what options do they really have?
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
Any quota obviously reduces immigration below the natural level.
A core function of an evil government.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
The fact that it takes 21 years for the child to become an "anchor"? I dunno. You tell me Damo.
When it turns 21 years old.
Wrong the anchor is immediate. The parents are given special consideration on their status at birth. The child is anchored thus the parents also. ALL are entitled to welfare benefits at birth of the anchor. The parents are given citizenship when the child turns 21
zappasguitar
Well-known member
But it DOES state that anyone BORN in this country DOES earn citizenship.
Can you possibly be that thick-headed, you dried up gash?
A test to be a citizen for all American might be a GREAT idea! I have to think about this one! It would really limit the numbers these days!
awww zappy, your hatred drips more profusely then your gonorrhea wife~~~
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Awwwwwwwwwwww...how pathetic does itmake you, that you spent the entire day whining about those who "attack the messenger" and then you completely ignore the truth of my comment to...wait for it...ATTACK THE MESSENGER.
EXACTLY what we've come to expect from one of DY's groupies...
Last edited:
I like better how you have spent your entire day reading what I write demonstrating your obsessive hatred
zappasguitar
Well-known member
I like better how you have spent your entire day reading what I write demonstrating your obsessive hatred
I'm sure it takes a knuckle-dragging idiot like you all day to read 18 posts in one single thread...those of us with triple digit IQ's...not quite so long.
WOW, so obsessed you have even counted them...you big fat hypocritical hater~~~
zappasguitar
Well-known member
One thread...18 posts...I understand though why this seems unusual to you.
Those of us with triple digit IQ's tend to notice little details like that.
I'm sure someone like you, who gets distracted every time you see a shiny object in your field of vision, couldn't possibly be expected to notice such small details.
Now how about you whine some more about how "attacking the messenger" is bad, even though it's all you've done since I first posted in this thread.
Zappa-still obsessing, still the hypocrite...
Dumb. It's as if you deliberately took out portions of my post... Oh that's because you did. Disingenuous weak argument.
The child is a citizen immediately, this gives them access to welfare (for the "child") and health care on our dime as well as (for the mother specifically) permanent resident status. That is an anchor. While they cannot sponsor citizenship until the child is 21, the mother has an anchor that keeps her firmly set in US soil.
Most of us with triple digit IQ's wouldn't waste the bandwith necessary for you to blow a fart never mind the gargantuan efforts you go to toot your own horn here!
Guess we'll just have to "take your word" your IQ is in the triple digits.
It's apparent your age tracks somewhere around 5 and that might be too generous!
Kamala Trump
Verified User
But in society, we have governments and governments control the borders on behalf of the people. And immigration effects the people differently, depending upon a myriad of factors.
No. It's a core function of a government which considers the needs of it's people.
Good Luck
New member
If I read your run-on sentence correctly, it has nothing to do with fear of terrorism or jihad. That is a different topic on the general issue of lack of border security, but not the issue of illegal immigration. There is the potential for a would-be terrorist to enter using the illegal immigration situation as a shield for their activities - but again that is not fear of the illegal immigrants themselves being a threat, but rather a threat hiding among them. There is also the concern of drug cartels using illegal immigrants for moving their product, but that, too, is not fear of the immigrant themselves.
What people are concerned about is the economic impact of illegal immigration. The unfortunate fact is local economies cannot sustain the load of the current high levels incidence of illegal immigration. First, those who do work almost invariably do so at lowered gray market under-the-table rates, which in turn makes them dependent on local assistance programs to make ends meet. (that is for those who do not qualify for government assistance.) Those cannot find work also become a burden on assistance programs. There is also the concern of illegal immigrants effect on employment: they bring wages down as well as occupying jobs, which in turn brings up unemployment - a significant concern in times of economic downturn.
Then there is the matter of the 14th amendment - the object of this thread - which says that a woman or couple who enter illegally and have a child, that child is automatically a U.S. citizen. That means that regardless of the legal status of the parents, the child is also automatically fully qualified for everything that a child born of citizens is, from assistance to public education. This puts the law in a quandry because they cannot in good conscience deport the parents because of the child, yet realistically we cannot afford an open door immigration policy. The end result is the wording of the 14th amendment results in people purposely coming here just to have their child and use it to keep themselves here, often using economic resources with little contribution.
Thus the debate becomes whether the wording of the 14th amendment is a mistake, or not, and if so, should it be changed, and by what method.