- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
@wildgrass saidBut it's NOT what they meant to have happen.Do you think in 1868 they knew there would be people swarming into America just to have kids as anchor babies?
All persons born here are citizens. That's whats written.
Jet-setting to America for a weekend delivery to give a baby US citezesnhip is NOT what they envisioned.
Neither is two illegals being smuggled into America to have a baby and claim it's a citizen.
It was 1868 FFS. Think about the time FFS.
@Cliff-Mashburn saidYou want SCOTUS to say that they didn't mean what they wrote?
But it's NOT what they meant to have happen.
Jet-setting to America for a weekend delivery to give a baby US citezesnhip is NOT what they envisioned.
Neither is two illegals being smuggled into America to have a baby and claim it's a citizen.
It was 1868 FFS. Think about the time FFS.
@no1marauder saidYeah, bring more non citizens into our country, children or not. Watch the plethora of workers results in low wages Then after that, don’t you know, the number of jobs becomes less than the number of workers, and that means tahr those illegals compete with your uncle Charlie for a job at the brick factory, where he will now make less money.
So you want the government to dictate who can or can't have a baby?
Of course, the most logical thing to do is to give people willing to come here, work and raise a family a prompt path to citizenship esp. now with the country's shortage of workers and low birth rate . That would solve your non-problem, wouldn't it?
Econ 101. Supply and demand don’t you know
Fool
@AverageJoe1 saidEasy. As long as someone plays within the rules as written, it's fine.
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.
But "chinee"?
@AverageJoe1 saidMaybe you should have thought of that first?
What if a certain chinese businessman is having a lot of surrogate babies, being born inside the USA,
(Thank goodness it seems that you did not.)
@AverageJoe1 saidWhy are you even allowed to post here?
@AverageJoe1
I don’t care if people have babies. Issue is citizens.
Fool
How did you allow yourself to become so mocking, inconsiderate, and laughingly cruel?
@AverageJoe1 saidIs this kind of thing really the best you have to offer to the world with your time remaining?
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.
@AverageJoe1 saidElon Musk seems to think some kind of post-monetary society is likely to develop in the next decade or two.
Yeah, bring more non citizens into our country, children or not. Watch the plethora of workers results in low wages Then after that, don’t you know, the number of jobs becomes less than the number of workers, and that means tahr those illegals compete with your uncle Charlie for a job at the brick factory, where he will now make less money.
Econ 101. Supply and demand don’t you know
Fool
As for your wide-ranging racism (against various human demographics), I imagine you are the type who would welcome space invaders with open arms and open orifices.
@Cliff-Mashburn saidLet's not even discuss that this doesn't happen, right?
But it's NOT what they meant to have happen.
Jet-setting to America for a weekend delivery to give a baby US citezesnhip is NOT what they envisioned.
Neither is two illegals being smuggled into America to have a baby and claim it's a citizen.
It was 1868 FFS. Think about the time FFS.
Get serious.
@AverageJoe1 saidYes, it DOES say, "all persons born or naturalized in the U.S.".
But it does not say, as you type a few clicks back, ‘everyone born here’ You say in that post that the constitution says everyone born here, so now sue will use that misinformation in her missives and spread it all over the forum.
And THAT is the inherent problem with the forum.
It is why I am here.
Learn to read.
@AverageJoe1 said"Invading"???
You see your meaningless texts. “People in the U.S.” could be women in prison, which I am def against, or a single mother of 7 having more babies. I am against that too. And, I am against victims of incest having babies.
Meaningless texts. So, could you whistle it down a tad and rephrase. Be specific . Oh, I am not against a non-citizen having a baby here after inv ...[text shortened]... inly not to have the baby be a citizen. Ha! Mom is not even a citizen!!! Topsy turvey, ain’t it.
Get real.
@AverageJoe1 saidAll that hypotheticals and you never did say what you think about birthright, just playing around the edges without committing yourself.
It has all been been resolved by academics with more knowledge of the subject than you and I. how could average Joe add to all of that. We could get into how there were no illegal immigrants around when they wrote the constitution but, I digress. I think we have been over that.
Ask me another question, though. I am not into redundancy. No one can compete with your re ...[text shortened]... n all rights of citizenship ?
That is 2 questions. The debate judges thus require 2 paragraphs.