I don't like anchor babies. This is how I would fix it.

IBDaMann said:
Right at that instant, that US citizen is a US citizen with the inalienable right to US citizenship.

Please don't pivot and start talking about other people who aren't US citizens as if any US citizen is somehow NOT a US citizen by mere association.


(sigh) You just had to pivot, didn't you?

Dial it back. The parents are OTHER PEOPLE. The Constitution exists to ensure minority and individual rights are protected. Nobody gets to strip any US citizen of any inalienable right, especially not because of the crimes of other people.

Yours is to explain why a US citizen who has not committed any crime should nonetheless be stripped of citizenship. Until then, your proposal is dismissed.
Click to expand...
You're the one pivoting not me. I'm talking about changing it for the better not the status quo. If you can't follow that bouncing ball I can't help you.

Not sure you're the sharpest tool in the shed some times.
 
ULTRA MAGA said:
You're the one pivoting not me.
Click to expand...
Nope. Thus far, everyone arguing for abolishing birthright citizenship, without exception, has based his argument on the principle of punishing people for the crimes of others. First you specify that you are discussing the living human born in the US, and then you immediately pivot and begin talking about other people who committed crimes (typically the parents), and then you conclude with "that's why we need to violate, nay, strip, the inalienable rights of the US citizen who did not commit the crimes I mentioned.

Yes, you pivoted. Your argument is not worthy of consideration until you explain why any US citizen should be stripped of his inalienable rights because of the crimes of others. The ball is in your court.

ULTRA MAGA said:
I'm talking about changing it for the better ...
Click to expand...
Nope. Stripping US citizens of their inalienable rights because of the crimes of others is Unconstitutional and is definitely not better. Not sure you're the brightest bulb in the pack, but I'll certainly give you the opportunity to explain what you need to explain.
 
ULTRA MAGA said:
You're the one pivoting not me. I'm talking about changing it for the better not the status quo. If you can't follow that bouncing ball I can't help you.

Not sure you're the sharpest tool in the shed some times.
Click to expand...
Status quo has been working just fine, karen, since 1868.

However, if you can get an amendment through, I will not oppose it.
 
Jake Starkey said:
No proof, Karen.

No proof, Karen.
Click to expand...
It's typical MAGAtry; a half-truth which means it's a whole lie. Those children are still in the US being raised by nannies and a judge stopped Xu from exercising parental rights over the children. He's a businessman and sought to build a dynasty with Elon Musk. Rich people are weird.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

‘China’s first father’: Billionaire with 100+ US-born kids dreams of marrying them into Elon Musk’s family - The Times of India

US News: Chinese billionaire Xu Bo reportedly fathered over 100 US-born children via surrogacy, aiming to create a family dynasty and marry them to Elon Musk's
timesofindia.indiatimes.com timesofindia.indiatimes.com
 
Or....we fix it by returning to a model of governance that doesn't create the problem in the first place

Return to a system of rugged individualism, personal responsibility, no forced charity, and actual capitalism - and all of a sudden you don't care
 
QP! said:
Do you speak it.

"All" by default when speaking about people means "All persons"

I quoted the full thing and then in my statement restating the "ALL" only changes nothing. It does not suggest "all lifeforms on earth" but that "ALL" does mean "ALL PERSONS".

Learn to comprehend what you read dunce.
Click to expand...
What is your IQ? Not a big number, it's pretty clear.
Ross Dolan said:
Ummm...is there anything you DO like, Ultra?
Click to expand...
I like the smell of a clean woman in the morning.
 
Jake Starkey said:
Status quo has been working just fine, karen, since 1868.

However, if you can get an amendment through, I will not oppose it.
Click to expand...
Status quo is on a decaying orbit due to modern communication and transportation that was impossible to foresee in 1868. Along with the welfare state we have evolved since then of course.

Happy to know you do have some common sense somewhere in your core. Maybe after Orange Man Bad is gone and someone else spear heads a revolt against it some of you mule heads will get on board?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top