Citizenship at Birth

[manasecret]

Originally Posted by TheGame

It's complicated, but generally most countries grant citezenship to the following people:

1) People who have at least one parent who is a citizen
2) If the child is adopted by a citizen (sometimes has an age restriction)
3) Registration (which is the most complicated, because you may not be able to register depending on where you're from. And registration usually consists of some type of test that asks country specific questions.)
4) What's called "naturalization" which is pretty much the government of the country simply making you a citezen for one reason or another. Usually a special circumstance.

America is one of very few countries that make citezenship a birth right based on where you're born, while ignoring the status of your parents.

Hmmm... I wonder what issues arise for them, then, if they have any big issues at all. France would I imagine be a good example, since they have immigration issues as well.

Like I said, I believe the wealth gradient at the border is the root cause of illegal immigration. Everything else is just half-measures. Mexico needs to be brought into the 1st-world, which would stop the avalanche of illegal immigration and would I imagine end a lot of suffering of destitute Mexicans who have no better option than to risk life and limb to cross the border.

Obviously that's no easy task, especially since we're not Mexico. I wouldn't even know where to start.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by manasecret

Hmmm... I wonder what issues arise for them, then, if they have any big issues at all. France would I imagine be a good example, since they have immigration issues as well.

Like I said, I believe the wealth gradient at the border is the root cause of illegal immigration. Everything else is just half-measures. Mexico needs to be brought into the 1st-world, which would stop the avalanche of illegal immigration and would I imagine end a lot of suffering of destitute Mexicans who have no better option than to risk life and limb to cross the border.

Obviously that's no easy task, especially since we're not Mexico. I wouldn't even know where to start.

I agree that is the biggest part of the problem. And there's no easy way to resolve it. As far as gaurding the borders and trying to handle it by force, I think we're at the limit that's acceptable in my opinion. I think nows the time to start looking at other ideas.

The problem I see though, is that eventually there's going to be some type of ID tags injected into americans at birth to prove they're citizens. Or there is going to be some type of north american union formed, which is only going to make the problem worse to start.

[Typhoid]

1) People do avoid keeping things that are TOO valuable in their house. That's what Banks are made for.

I don't keep my guitar, truck, phone, TV, console and subsequent games, computer, watches/chains, rings, sunglasses, and various other items in the bank. I keep money in there.

2) The measures of protection you can take on a single house (in america) is a lot more harsh then you could ever do for a country

Yeah - this is why the house was a metaphor.

And if someone happens to jump over, lets shoot and kill them on the spot. Especially the pregnant lady who tries to come in, that'll teach em.

Wow - so you go from one extreme of me saying I love illegal immigrants, to insinuating that now I think the pregnant women should be shot on sight after crossing the border. What will you tell me I think next? The anticipation is killing me. Not literally, of course. I didn't cross a border or anything.

I just think there are other ways to slow the bleeding.

If you get stabbed, do you want to just 'slow the bleeding', or fix the wound?

The problem I see though, is that eventually there's going to be some type of ID tags injected into americans at birth to prove they're citizens. Or there is going to be some type of north american union formed, which is only going to make the problem worse to start.

This paragraph in itself is just...odd.
You jump from ID tags for Americans to a North American union which somehow will make it worse, in practically one thought.

First off, being that Mexico and most subsequent countries that are the subject of this topic - are in North America.
And I'm fairly certain that if Canada, the US, Mexico, Cuba [etc.] were part of a union - that would in no way stop a Mexican family from leaving their country to go to a better place to raise their child. I also don't see how this would make more people leave their countries and flood into yours.

Secondly, about the ID tags. How would that stop them, exactly? If the tags are implanted at birth - this wouldn't deter anyone from wanting to birth a child in the US - if anything it would make more people want to do it illegally, because then they'd have 100% proof that their child is an American.

The fact is, it's ridiculous. Yes, a child of the US can get the parents a green card [after reaching the age of 21, and filing the proper paper work in the US, and their original country, which usually have wait times, for this exact scenario]. The 14th amendment was brought forth so slaves [and their children] would be US citizens, despite being slaves. Now, even knocking that aside, the 14th amendment stands for the fact that regardless of religion, sexuality, gender, skin colour - everyone is equal. Everyone. If you are born there, you are just as equal as the baby laying next to you that was also born that day. You deserve every right as that other child.

Now just imagine, if the amendment never existed. How many black Americans wouldn't be classified as citizens today because they 'illegally' entered the country [being that their parents technically were not American]. History is a fascinating thing.

[TheGame]

Typhoid, once again, you're not offering ANY ideas for how to "resolve" the problem. You're just saying "fix it" but you seem to be closed minded to anything that isn't the status quo. If things stay the same, the problem will not be fixed. So what do you think needs to be CHANGED to fix the problem?

Since you haven't answered that question directly, I have been jumping to different extemes based off of your objections to everything. You seem to both object to trying to remove incentives, and also appear to reject trying to increase security by force. So what do you propose we do?

And if you give a bullshit answer again citing no direct ideas and just saying "fix it", then I assume you don't think illegal immigration is an issue and like the status quo.

[Typhoid]

Since you haven't answered that question directly

I'm pretty sure I've said things like it several times. Maybe you're just choosing not to comprehend that part of my posts for the sake of your argument.

I said:

Get some bouncers to watch my doors and windows. If they start coming through the chimney, put some bouncers on the roof. Especially if the people who are inside my house need work to do, I'd put them to work watching my doors.

Which in the metaphor of the house being the USA, the doors and all openings into it are obviously borders.

Not to mention being that I've said numerous times "The problem isn't people having babies in your country, it's people getting in illegally" I was fairly sure that gave across a "Stop them from getting in illegally" type of thing.

From my first post:

"If you stop people from illegally entering your country, then you wouldn't need to fix the birth right."

From my second post, specifically addressing you:

"I'd argue that all that needs to be watched is obviously the southern US. I mean, that's honestly all this is about - Mexicans and Cubans getting into the US illegally."

You seem to both object to trying to remove incentives, and also appear to reject trying to increase security by force.

What in the blue hell are you flapping your face about?
When have I appeared to reject increasing security by force? When you suggested they shoot pregnant mothers, you mean? When I said I don't agree with you on murdering pregnant women?
Or are you saying I'm against them using force because I haven't said I want them to shoot Mexicans, opposed to just increasing border patrol and security.

So what do you propose we do?

For probably the 4th time - increase border patrol. Is it hard to do? In some ways. Is it impossible? Hell no. Increase security along the US-Mexico border. Does this involve super high fences of barbed wire, missiles, guns, and hunting dogs? No. All it requires at most is a fence, and security towers with guards watching cameras. Do they need a shoot-first mentality? No. No they do not.

And if you give a bullshit answer again citing no direct ideas and just saying "fix it", then I assume you don't think illegal immigration is an issue and like the status quo.

Well, hopefully this time you read all of my post - and not just the parts that you feel like arguing with.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

For probably the 4th time - increase border patrol. Is it hard to do? In some ways. Is it impossible? Hell no. Increase security along the US-Mexico border.

You did not even say that once before, you only used the bouncer metaphor. But we can put that to rest.

So you think that throwing more people on the border will resolve the problem? How many people do we need to put there? It's not like people can just walk across the border as it is now. And even if the way by land is blocked (as it very much is now), people can stil make it over by sea and via under ground tunnels.

I personally don't think that resolves the problem, because that's exactly what we have been trying to do and failing at for years,

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by TheGame

You did not even say that once before, you only used the bouncer metaphor. But we can put that to rest.

As posted by me:

Now, It wouldn't be hard for the US to establish cameras, stations, and employ people to watch that border. Afterall, it does create more jobs, aswell. Two birds.