@no1marauder saidYou most certainly did not. A one sentence answer would be fine, should these surrogated children be granted citizenship. Actually a one word answer is what we are looking for a yes or a no. Your loyal disciple Suzanne is watching And needs someone to look up to. I hope you will not embarrass yourself.
I answered your question so GFY.
@AverageJoe1 saidThey're not "granted" anything, they are US citizens by operation of the Constitution of this country.
You most certainly did not. A one sentence answer would be fine, should these surrogated children be granted citizenship. Actually a one word answer is what we are looking for a yes or a no. Your loyal disciple Suzanne is watching And needs someone to look up to. I hope you will not embarrass yourself.
And it's a good thing. Our birth rate is dangerously low and money is being sent to surrogate parents and agencies.
So what's the problem?
@Cliff-Mashburn saidThat's your opinion, but it isn't what our laws say.
Two illegal aliens having a baby in the country should not produce an American citizen.
It should produce a third illegal alien.
SCOTUS shouldn't make amendments to the Constitution.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
@wildgrass saidSCOTUS can't make amendments to the constitution.
That's your opinion, but it isn't what our laws say.
SCOTUS shouldn't make amendments to the Constitution.
Did you not listen in your high school civics class?
1 edit
@no1marauder saidNo no no no….I am asking you if it is logical, does it make common sense, is it rational for our country to allow people Willy-nilly , from all 194 countries on the planet, to deposit their children in any fashion, into our country , and make these people citizens with the same benefits that you and I have.
They're not "granted" anything, they are US citizens by operation of the Constitution of this country.
And it's a good thing. Our birth rate is dangerously low and money is being sent to surrogate parents and agencies.
So what's the problem?
Maraldo will not be able to answer this question because all of the books on his desk and his computer cannot find an answer for him. So can anyone else here answer from your heart this question. There is no link in the universe that you could put in an answer to this question, since it is a question of your personal opinion as to how a country should manage citizens.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidHow many times do I have to say I don't see any problem with birthright citizenship as intended by the Constitution?
No no no no….I am asking you if it is logical, does it make common sense, is it rational for our country to allow people Willy-nilly , from all 194 countries on the planet, to deposit their children in any fashion, into our country , and make these people citizens with the same benefits that you and I have.
Maraldo will not be able to answer this question because ...[text shortened]... uestion, since it is a question of your personal opinion as to how a country should manage citizens.
Get it through your empty skull.
The children are born here not "deposited".
1 edit
@Cliff-Mashburn saidOh maybe it's the other thread on the same topic where a bunch of you MAGA want SCOTUS to "rule" on ending birthright citizenship.
SCOTUS can't make amendments to the constitution.
Did you not listen in your high school civics class?
Courts interpret the constitution not manage immigration policy. If the concern is visa abuse that's an executive branch issue.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidThis is what you answered with. So I was naturally detoured into what “constitution says”.. I asked lib Marauder what HE HE HE thinks about our country making deposited ,,,yes, deposited…..children full citizens.
More citizens just like the Constitution says?
What's not to like?
Here's an article on the story:https://www.ndtv.com/offbeat/chinese-billionaire-has-over-100-surrogate-children-in-us-heres-what-he-wants-9816164
Looks like he's mainly doing it here because surrogacy parenting is banned in China.
Still won’t tell us what he thinks. This is the mindset, the gear set, of a bot. Bots don’t think for themselves.
I win. Your time is up. Win.
@wildgrass saidWhat do our laws say? Why don’t you tell us? What article? 14th doesn’t mention invaders. An invader, say a Mozambican or some other person from 193 countries? Say What?!? Lille feller?
That's your opinion, but it isn't what our laws say.
SCOTUS shouldn't make amendments to the Constitution.
Say it. Say foreign nationals from any country should be able to claim citizenship for any child born here, inluding one hundred children carried by surrogates.. Say it. Marauder only quotes his books.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidI think it was Scalia who famously wrote, "it's stupid, but constitutional."
What do our laws say? Why don’t you tell us? What article? 14th doesn’t mention invaders. An invader, say a Mozambican or some other person from 193 countries? Say What?!? Lille feller?
Say it. Say foreign nationals from any country should be able to claim citizenship for any child born here, inluding one hundred children carried by surrogates.. Say it. Marauder only quotes his books.
Congress can change law, executive branch can suspend visas etc. but the court can't change what's written in the constitution. Marauder quotes the Constitution because that's what courts use.
2 edits
@AverageJoe1 saidI told you what I think, idiot.
This is what you answered with. So I was naturally detoured into what “constitution says”.. I asked lib Marauder what HE HE HE thinks about our country making deposited ,,,yes, deposited…..children full citizens.
Still won’t tell us what he thinks. This is the mindset, the gear set, of a bot. Bots don’t think for themselves.
I win. Your time is up. Win.
The story is some Chinese billionaire wants a bunch of kids and wants to do it via surrogacy parenting. That's illegal in China but perfectly legal in the US So he's paying for it to be done here making the children born here US citizens.
So businesses in the US i.e. surrogate agencies, doctors and the other parent.are making money.
The US, a country with a low birth rate, is getting new citizens.
That sure sounds like a good deal for everyone concerned.
So answer my question;
What's your problem with it?
And maybe your Mommy and Daddy haven't explained this to you, but babies aren't "deposited" by the stork but born.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidSo you weaponize a few outliers and your solution is to refuse birthright citizenship to EVERYONE. Just like a sociopathic answer.
What if a certain chinese businessman is having a lot of surrogate babies, being born inside the USA, for his announced intended purpose to have a large family to run his billionaire (vid games) business. The primary reasoning has them being citizens of the United States of America when they run his company, a chinee company, inside the USA. That is happening. Here is a W ...[text shortened]... berated response, please chime in with your opinions. Your ideas may help him shore up his response.
Throw out the baby with the bath water.
Do you seriously think a dude like that is going to advertise his motives? BTW, the constitution says EVERYONE BORN here. If you want to change that amendment, all you need is majority of house and senate and 75% of ALL US states to ratify, so go to town, will wait for your effort to bear fruit.
If and when that happens and a new amendment stopping the old amendment, all you have is OPINION.
Also, SCOTUS cannot overrule a constitutional amendment BTW.
@wildgrass saidYeah we probably all, even SHouse knew that. No refresh course needed. Yes that’s what Marauder wrote about …..the constitution. I wanted him and you to say what you think, like if you were a king of the USA would you do that or not. The constitution not withstanding. The question is not that hard, but since it is unanswerable by you, you pretend that it is just too darn hard! Give us all a break, please, we see thru you being up against a wall.
I think it was Scalia who famously wrote, "it's stupid, but constitutional."
Congress can change law, executive branch can suspend visas etc. but the court can't change what's written in the constitution. Marauder quotes the Constitution because that's what courts use.
Any fool would say that you and marauder are conflicted, as you certainly would not do that if you were king, ..let any of the 8 billion people in our world deposit their children by unnatural means into our country, and we stamp citizen on his forehead.
@sonhouse saidThe constitution says everyone born here?!?!?!
So you weaponize a few outliers and your solution is to refuse birthright citizenship to EVERYONE. Just like a sociopathic answer.
Throw out the baby with the bath water.
Do you seriously think a dude like that is going to advertise his motives? BTW, the constitution says EVERYONE BORN here. If you want to change that amendment, all you need is majority of house and senate ...[text shortened]... amendment, all you have is OPINION.
Also, SCOTUS cannot overrule a constitutional amendment BTW.
And you say that the Scotus cannot overrule an amendment. But they can do other things to an amendment, like interpret the amendment. You see that is their number one reason for even existing …to interpret the constitution as same applies to our world. You can call it override if you want to, you can call a guy a girl if you want to, but that don’t make it so.