Jump to content
IGNORED

WorthyNews: Trump says administration looking 'seriously' at ending birthright citizenship


WorthyNewsBot

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Bots
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  39,879
  • Topics Per Day:  6.49
  • Content Count:  44,074
  • Content Per Day:  7.18
  • Reputation:   980
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  06/06/2007
  • Status:  Offline


  • Group:  Catholic
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  591
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   96
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/05/2019
  • Status:  Offline

On ‎8‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 1:57 AM, WorthyNewsBot said:

this is another of the many weird policies that previous presidents should have fixed but didn't.

And people wonder why I love Trump?

No one should be a citizen just because he or she is born on our soil, when the parents are illegal. That makes about much sense as.. our asylum policies (which are also being changed)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

I'm always curious why often the same people that treat the second amendment like divine law want to toss out the fourteenth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  385
  • Topics Per Day:  0.10
  • Content Count:  7,692
  • Content Per Day:  1.94
  • Reputation:   4,809
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  05/28/2013
  • Status:  Offline

On 8/26/2019 at 8:55 PM, createdequal said:

No one should be a citizen just because he or she is born on our soil,

 14th Amendment to the Constitution (1868). Section 1 of this amendment declares that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." 

Quote

And people wonder why I love Trump?

Yeah. I guess I do.  But I will end up making my head hurt if I try to think about it.

 

Edited by LadyKay
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  385
  • Topics Per Day:  0.10
  • Content Count:  7,692
  • Content Per Day:  1.94
  • Reputation:   4,809
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  05/28/2013
  • Status:  Offline

3 hours ago, one.opinion said:

I'm always curious why often the same people that treat the second amendment like divine law want to toss out the fourteenth.

They also seem to toss out  Leviticus 19:33-34  When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. 34 The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

 

Edited by LadyKay
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • This is Worthy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Catholic
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  591
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   96
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/05/2019
  • Status:  Offline

On ‎8‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 9:19 AM, LadyKay said:

 14th Amendment to the Constitution (1868). Section 1 of this amendment declares that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." 

Yeah. I guess I do.  But I will end up making my head hurt if I try to think about it.

 

looks like u forgot the part "AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof.." [emphasis added]

children born to illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof because their parents are illegal

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  7
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  893
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   527
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  12/06/2002
  • Status:  Offline

On 9/1/2019 at 5:37 AM, createdequal said:

children born to illegals are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof because their parents are illegal

Ok I am puzzled.  In my country whether someone is in the country legally or legally.. I think they are still under the jurisdiction of the laws here?    Isn't it the same in the Usa?  

Just wondering what was meant.  Thanks.

 

*edited to add the correction below

An exemption folk with diplomatic immunity etc might not be under the jurusdiction of the laws of the country they are serving in..  but most other folk are I think? 

Edited by just_abc
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Graduated to Heaven
  • Followers:  57
  • Topic Count:  1,546
  • Topics Per Day:  0.21
  • Content Count:  10,320
  • Content Per Day:  1.42
  • Reputation:   12,323
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  04/15/2004
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/05/1951

2 minutes ago, just_abc said:

Ok I am puzzled.  In my country whether someone is in the country legally or legally.. I think they are still under the jurisdiction of the laws here?    Isn't it the same in the Usa?  

Just wondering what was meant.  Thanks.

Perhaps as non-citizens, they are not have the same legal rights, protections, and privileges!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

  • Group:  Catholic
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  62
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  591
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   96
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/05/2019
  • Status:  Offline

On 9/3/2019 at 12:04 AM, just_abc said:

Ok I am puzzled.  In my country whether someone is in the country legally or legally.. I think they are still under the jurisdiction of the laws here?    Isn't it the same in the Usa?  

Just wondering what was meant.  Thanks.

 

*edited to add the correction below

An exemption folk with diplomatic immunity etc might not be under the jurusdiction of the laws of the country they are serving in..  but most other folk are I think? 

illegals are subject to the jurisdiction of their own country until they belong to another, become citizens of another country.

of course it goes w/o saying they are subject to the laws of the country they are living in.. That alone does not make them a citizen. Only going through the process of becoming a citizen makes them a legal citizen.

Edited by createdequal
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  7
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  893
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   527
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  12/06/2002
  • Status:  Offline

11 hours ago, createdequal said:

of course it goes w/o saying they are subject to the laws of the country they are living in.. That alone does not make them a citizen. Only going through the process of becoming a citizen makes them a legal citizen.

Thanks for explaining.

I am still a bit puzzled though.  Is the term "jurisdiction" in the 14th Ammendment sentence refering to a different type of jurisdiction and not refering to someone being subject to a country's laws etc?  If so I am wondering what is the type of jurisdiction that is being refered to?  Is it refering to jurisdiction countries have over their own citizens?

I am wondering partly because *if * the jurisdiction that is being refered to is the jurisdiction that different countries have over their own citizens.... then in the case of any child being born on Usa soil.. including those born to american parents.. wouldn't that child need to already have american citizenship in order to be subject to that type of jurisdiction? (since I think that type of jurisdiction applies to those who are already citizens of a country?..  and that sentence in the Ammendment regarding jurisdiction I think seems to be refering specifically to the child and not the parent?)

So in other words.. in order to be given american citizenship.. a child would need to already be an american citizen..... ?  :blink: 

Or in yet other words.. in order for the child to be 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' .. (assuming that the word jurisdiction in that sentence is refering to a jurisdiction that countries have over their own citizens).. the child would need to already be an american citizen.... But to already be an american citizen the child would first have to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Usa.. 

Sorry but to me I think that is confusing..?  It seems almost like a catch 22 situation? 

Or maybe I am just confusing myself lol  :unsure: Sorry!

Thanks for your patience.

:)

ps  I don't know the whole Ammendment.. so am just refering to the sentence /clip that was quoted earlier in this thread.  ..If elsewhere in the American Constitution or Ammendment.. this issue had already been explained .. then please forgive me.  Just basing the catch 22 perception on just that earlier sentence / clip.  Thanks and sorry.

Edited by just_abc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...