Time: Arizona Republicans will likely introduce legislation this fall that would deny birth certificates to children born in Arizona

[Predicto]

Seriously -- as of my vote, 53% of the folks on this board AGREE with this law?! REALLY?

Let me guess: This same 50%+ are many of the same ones who talk about "freedom" and "the Constitution." right?

They are Strict Constitutionalists.

That means that the Constitution will be construed strictly in favor of people like themselves, and will be construed strictly against everyone who is different from them. :pfft:

[Baculus]

Read the thread.

Many of us voting yes dont support the law, but support the act of proposing it and the reaction it has brought.

Sorry, but I don't buy that. If you support the proposing of it, you support the law.

[Baculus]

They are Strict Constitutionalists.

That means that the Constitution will be construed strictly in favor of people like themselves, and will be construed strictly against everyone who is different from them. :pfft:

Of course! :-)

It's absurd. I think I have given up long ago expecting some consistency from a certain political wing of this country.

[Larry]

Does anyone here think that the majority of illegal aliens having 'anchor babies' have actually read the constitution, or even the 14th amendment? I think it would be a safe bet that a friend of a friend of a friend was able to have an 'anchor baby', so why not try it? They probably don't know any better, and/or don't have access to even read the constitution. While the law may be in place, it may be a story that gets passed around that it is possible. If we are talking about it here, wouldn't it be plausible that it is also talked about wherever the illegal aliens are coming from?

So your point is that you approve of state legislatures violating the US Constitution, and denying Constitutional rights to US citizens, as long as you've generalized that said citizens probably don't know that the Constitution is being violated?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Thanks for answering, I really had no idea one way or the other if there were stipulations to the law, but thats what I figured. What if under our US jurisdiction, the two that would be under our jurisdiction, they did not want to be US Citizens, would it matter what they wanted? Would they have to become US Citizens because of this law, or do they get a choice? I'm just trying to see how far the law goes.

Citizenship attaches at birth.

There is a process involved for renouncing one's citizenship. But you have to be 18 to do so.

[Teller]

They are Strict Constitutionalists.

That means that the Constitution will be construed strictly in favor of people like themselves, and will be construed strictly against everyone who is different from them. :pfft:

Those people who would do that are pretty dumb and transparent.

I put them right up there with the "busting American employers will fix the entire problem" loons.

[19Skins72]

I voted yes because I believe it is time to stop awarding citizenship to the soon to be born children of every Tom, Dick, and Harry that illegally cross the border.

I totally expect this law to be found unconstitutional in Federal court, but it's still a good idea imho.

To be fair, I deeply dislike Az's other recent "anti illegal" legislation that will imho target all hispanics - legal citizens or not.

[Kilmer17]

Sorry, but I don't buy that. If you support the proposing of it, you support the law.

Again, your narrow liberal view would leave you only that conclusion.

The truth is much more nuanced and probably too difficult for you to comprehend.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Again, your narrow liberal view would leave you only that conclusion.

The truth is much more nuanced and probably too difficult for you to comprehend.

Where is your petition for a constitutional convention in order to get an amendment to change birth-right citizenship?

[Kilmer17]

Where is your petition for a constitutional convention in order to get an amendment to change birth-right citizenship?

I dont think we should change it.

[JimboDaMan]

I dont think we should change it.

Really?!?

I can see arguments for changing that part of the Constitutuon.

I can't see arguments for the grandstanding tomfoolery going on in Arizona, especially if changing birthright citizenship is not the objective.

My narrow liberal viewpoint makes it too difficult for me to comprehend.

[Kilmer17]

Really?!?

I can see arguments for changing that part of the Constitutuon.

I can't see arguments for the grandstanding tomfoolery going on in Arizona, especially if changing birthright citizenship is not the objective.

My narrow liberal viewpoint makes it too difficult for me to comprehend.

It appears that way.

[Baculus]

Again, your narrow liberal view would leave you only that conclusion.

This statement has all sorts of layered irony behind it.

"You are narrow minded for not supporting my narrow minded view!"

The truth is much more nuanced and probably too difficult for you to comprehend.

Oh, really?

Wanting to deny a birth certificate due to a fear of so-called "anchor babies" ain't nuanced, I am sorry to say. You may think it is, but it's a self-delusion.

[Baculus]

It appears that way.

It's your own narrow view that makes you incapable of appreciating anyone's opposing view on this. After all, have you at all considered to why so-called liberals would disagree with the notion of denying birth certificates to a child, and why it just sounds like a bad idea?

[Baculus]

I voted yes because I believe it is time to stop awarding citizenship to the soon to be born children of every Tom, Dick, and Harry that illegally cross the border.

I totally expect this law to be found unconstitutional in Federal court, but it's still a good idea imho.

To be fair, I deeply dislike Az's other recent "anti illegal" legislation that will imho target all hispanics - legal citizens or not.

That's bizarre. You don't support the recent AZ legislation because it would "target all hispanics," but you would support a law that would, in fact, "target Hispanics."

You know, good thing we didn't have these laws when every "Tom, Dick, and Harry" from Europe were coming here and having all those "anchor babies." You know?

[Baculus]

So, you know's what is next after this? Stripping citizenship from Americans whose parents were illegal. That is down the pipe, and I would bet, especially if the GOP/Tea Party make some gains this November, we'll see that legislation in the next year.

[rocazares]

Asbury, you're the kind of american citizen the US need. Really.

What's next? poison all the babies in a gas chamber???

Instead of spend money in war, all the continent needs to focus in equal education, principles, corruption, well based economy etc etc.

We are the People of the United States of America, a nation of people who are guided by laws, and our preeminent law and guiding document is the Constitution of the United States. We are the people who stand and look at the world abroad and decry the harshness of foreign regimes, we are the people who stand in advocacy for the recognition of the basic human rights of all people.

We are NOT the people who abandon our most sacred and guiding principles whenever they are inconvenient...or at least I hope we are not, but it seems that more and more we are....much to our demise.

[Kilmer17]

It's your own narrow view that makes you incapable of appreciating anyone's opposing view on this. After all, have you at all considered to why so-called liberals would disagree with the notion of denying birth certificates to a child, and why it just sounds like a bad idea?

Again, I think that you are simply incapable of understanding my postion on this.

This would be a bad law, and unconstitutional. I dont want anyone born on US soil denied Citizenship.

That doesnt mean I dont support the underlying benefits of PROPOSING the law.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Again, I think that you are simply incapable of understanding my postion on this.

This would be a bad law, and unconstitutional. I dont want anyone born on US soil denied Citizenship.

That doesnt mean I dont support the underlying benefits of PROPOSING the law.

I think I get what you're saying, you like the passing of this law or at least the proposing of it in order to draw Federal attention to the issue.

I don't agree with you, but at least I can understand where you're coming from.

[jnhay]

Nothing screams moral values like taking it out on children. Then again it's AZ we are talking about. The only thing they do well is crazy.

I think it makes sense though. Why should the child be a citizen when their parents should have never been there in the first place? If a family sneaks into an amusement park, they all kicked out. It's not our fault the kid's parents broke the law. If I were a kid getting deported, I'd blame my parents, not the government.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I think it makes sense though. Why should the child be a citizen when their parents should have never been there in the first place?

Because that's what the Constitution says.

[Kilmer17]

I think I get what you're saying, you like the passing of this law or at least the proposing of it in order to draw Federal attention to the issue.

I don't agree with you, but at least I can understand where you're coming from.

Thats it exactly. Thanks.

I also think there could be some benefit if people in Mexico THINK this has become the law.

I dont support this BECOMING law, but proposing it has benefits.

[Box76]

Because that's what the Constitution says.

Feel free to defend how the Constitution also says our Fed Gov't will protect US citizens from 'foreign invaders'. If we are to be protected from these invaders how can their children be considered citizens and not by extension also 'foreign invaders'? Defies common sense. They aren't supposed to be here to procreate. Thats why there should be no question about the intent of the 14th Amendment if you follow the rule of law of the Constitution.

[The 12th Commandment]

Invaders? I'm not scared of these little punks or their spawn I have my big fortress to protect me!

[Blackest Eyes]

I don't necessarily think this is a great idea. However, some sort of attention has to be given to this issue. People seem to be able to cross so easily.

Denying birth certificates to children born here seems harsh. At the same time though, if we keep the kid here and deport the parents, we create another problem because the kid will be put in an orphanage or something.

The process for becoming a US citizen legally must be a total fustercluck because it seems that if it were easier, we wouldn't be having this problem. Though, I could be totally incorrect about that assumption.