Republicans want review of birthright citizenship

[Hot Mega]

Yeah, I stayed awake in history class too. :tongue: It was my favorite subject next to English. My overall point though was that parts of the Constitution have been changed before. It's important to do so when change is necessary.

I'd better stop now though. If I keep saying change, I might end up living in the White House.

Or...some other enterprising reader could start enumerating for us how many times you've use it.:dunno::anonymous

Besides that...if you did stay awake, you would have known that it wasn't 3/5s of a person...it was 3/5s "of all other persons". Meaning toward population.

 

[Ace Bandage]

Andronicus Ry, the right to own slaves was never a constitutional amendment and was thus never overturned by a repeal. Whose the one beating a dead horse here?

But I agree with you about repealing all the laws from the 18th century.



Good thing that the 14 amendment was written in the 19th century.

You're splitting hairs. Yes, slavery is not mentioned, but it is implied. In short:

"...they used phrases like "importation of Persons" at Article 1, Section 9 for the slave trade, "other persons" at Article 1, Section 2, and "person held to service or labor" at Article 4, Section 2 for slaves. Not until the 13th Amendment was slavery mentioned specifically in the Constitution. There the term was used to ensure that there was to be no ambiguity as what exactly the words were eliminating. In the 14th Amendment, the euphemism "other persons" (and the three-fifths value given a slave) was eliminated."

And the Emancipation Proclamation may not have been an amendment, but it was an executive order which grants authority to the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy under Article II, section 2 of the Constitution.

 

[PlumpRump]

...And the Emancipation Proclamation may not have been an amendment, but it was an executive order which grants authority to the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy under Article II, section 2 of the Constitution.

To further your point, this is the full text of the 13th Amendment, which authorizes the Congress to provide for an end to slavery through appropriate legislation:

Amendment XIII
(Ratified December 6, 1865)

1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

[Mayhem]

Yeah, I stayed awake in history class too. :tongue: It was my favorite subject next to English. My overall point though was that parts of the Constitution have been changed before. It's important to do so when change is necessary.

Sometimes we get so deep into an issue, I forget what my original thoughts were, at the basic level. This review is racism to me. If we had an illegal immigration "problem" coming from Canada, people would not nearly be so concerned. But when people of a skin color other than white are involved, when any language other than english is involved, now it becomes a problem. And I've lived this issue. I lived in central Washington state, where we have a huge hispanic population, legal and otherwise. Now I live in Vegas where I'm listening to spanish being spoken outside my door at this very moment. I don't know what kind of hispanic hotbed Indiana is, but I doubt it's any more than where I've been.

If nothing else, one thing is true. These people are genuinely working the jobs no one else wants. So, where is the big deal? Are any of you going to pick apples, pears, avocados? Shit no. So if you get what you want, say goodbye to the produce aisle. Or get ready to pay $1 per apple. Because that's the only way we're going to get any spoiled-ass, union demanding white people out to the fields.

 

[Facetious]

Wouldn't you rather see that money go towards something better? Or maybe stay in the pockets of those who earned it, for them and their children and not some illegal resident from another country and their children?
maybe?

There are no ''illegal'' citizens, remember? We're all part of a new progressive world citizen conglomerate . . . as they see things anyway.

 

[JayJohn85]

Woah the neo cons fucking up over there, Most excellent! No wonder old staples arent posting as much anymore.

 

[meesterperfect]

I also find it funny that these same types rabidly defend the second amendment, but that's Ok, I guess. I suppose that we are supposed to just pick and choose which constitutional rights we should have based on the whims of one political party.

This is not just hypocrisy, it's insanity.

Well, while we are at it I think that they need to repeal the third amendment.

Let's see how much Americans "support our troops" when they are sleeping on your couch and mooching off your stuff.

Thats just not fair senator calpoon.
These are 2 completely different situations.
I defend the 2nd amendment, that is that citizens without a criminal record or mental history should have the right to bear arms.
I don't support one that says a person can enter the USA illegally, have a child and that child is automatically a USA citizen.
especially since literally millions have done it and continue to do so.
the fact that the UsA pays for the delivery, pre and post natal care is another thing.

but the 2 amendments are different, very different.


seriously, to you its no problem that millions do what i said they do and the legal, taxpaying citizens are the ones who pay for it?
to you thats cool?

 

[Mayhem]

Thats just not fair senator calpoon.
These are 2 completely different situations.
I defend the 2nd amendment, that is that citizens without a criminal record or mental history should have the right to bear arms.
I don't support one that says a person can enter the USA illegally, have a child and that child is automatically a USA citizen.
especially since literally millions have done it and continue to do so.
the fact that the UsA pays for the delivery, pre and post natal care is another thing.

but the 2 amendments are different, very different.


seriously, to you its no problem that millions do what i said they do and the legal, taxpaying citizens are the ones who pay for it?
to you thats cool?

Millions?? Maybe over the course of many, many years. But let's not leave the impression that it's every year.

I'm sorry, but when I see people living in some of the worst kinds of poverty, then I see a river you can wade across to a place where your unborn child has better than a 50/50 chance of living past 6 months.......WTF do you expect people to do? Are we so worried about the trickle down, trickle up, or whatever kind of economics it is; that we simply don't care about our neighbors kids?? I don't know if I can do that, but I sure as hell know that I won't.

To quote an exchange from that most Liberal of TV shows, The West Wing:

"That's the price you pay."
"For what?"
"For being rich, free and alive.....all at the same time."