Citizenship at Birth

[Professor S]

An increasing issue at the center of the US citizenship debate is the 14th amendment that grants citizenship to anyone born within the borders of the United States. The US is one of the few developed countries that offers this benefit of location (other notable nations include Canada, Brazil and Romania) and many believe that it encourages neighbor citizens (mainly Mexican) to cross the border to give birth, an unintended consequence of the amendment (initially intended to guarantee the rights of freed slaves). This leads to many complications in managing immigration, creating what some call "Anchor Babies".

What are your thoughts on potentially repealing this amendment? Before rushing to judgement on what you think my opinion is or my motivations in posting this, I'm undecided. At the very most I think this is the least important part of immigration debate.

[manasecret]

Originally Posted by Professor S

At the very most I think this is the least important part of immigration debate.

This is my opinion. This isn't the root problem. Fix illegal immigration, and the issue all but disappears.

Question: If citizenship isn't granted simply when you're born here, what are the criteria?

[Typhoid]

The entire problem is with illegal immigration.
If you stop people from illegally entering your country, then you wouldn't need to fix the birth right.

It just seems like a shitty solution. A very shitty solution.

"We still have many people coming into our country illegally, giving birth to a child [whether intentional or not] and that child is a US citizen. How can we fix this?"

"Well...we can make it so that anyone born here isn't a citizen."

"Even children of people who are citizens, or legally move here?"

"Yes. That'll get those damn Mexicans to stop coming here."

"Wait, why can't we just fix immigration instead of removing everyones right to be a citizen because of a handful [in the scheme of things] of people?"


If you don't want people going illegally to the country, stop them from entering. Don't remove 1 of the incentives.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

If you don't want people going illegally to the country, stop them from entering. Don't remove 1 of the incentives.

How are we supposed to stop it though? I agree that stopping them is a bigger problem, but it's not as easy as removing incentives. We're a huge county bordering two other huge countries with two huge coastlines. There is no way that every single inch of the border can be watched 24/7. So no matter how you slice it, illegals ARE going to get in. So how things are managed on our land once they get here is just as important as trying to stop them.

[Typhoid]

There is no way that every single inch of the border can be watched 24/7.

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. No [not many, at least] Canadians would be illegally defecting to the US to have a child in order for American healthcare. I think your northern border is essentially safe in that aspect.

I'd also argue no illegal immigrants should be coming from Asia, or overseas by large boat or crate. If they are - that's up to the port authority to check each shipment to make sure that A) There are no people inside it for whatever reason and B) He's doing his job. Shipments should be checked.

This just leaves us with the border directly above Mexico, and the coastal waters of the gulf.

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.

Then that leaves us with people who float over from Cuba, which I will agree, would be hard to deal with.

I just think in principle it's stupid to remove the citizenship to a person born there. Regardless if the parents got there illegally, the child had nothing to do with that. The child was born inside of your borders, therefore being the only place that child has ever been, making that child [in this case] American.

"How do we stop people from illegally trafficiking cocaine into the US without actually having to put in effort to catch the people committing the crimes?"
"Uhh...make it....legal to traffick?"

[Professor S]

I don't think anyone is talking about removing citizenship, only stopping the practices of granting it to non-citizen born children because they were born in the US. And I have to agree that there is no way to watch or protect the US border 24/7.

I used to be a proponent of amnesty, but with how minimum wage has become a living wage and continued expansion of welfare benefits/entitlements I don't think its realistic anymore if we don't want the system to collapse on itself once 15 million illegals are given citizenship and guaranteed those entitlements.

In the end, that leaves a guest worker option as the only real solution. and that is just a modern version of a class based labor system. Ugh.

[TheGame]

It's not like the US hasn't been trying for ages to stop people from crossing that border.. And they have been trying to do it by force without getting rid of any of the incentives for someone to come across that line. I'm open to a different approach.

Also, even if there was some new berlin wall built down there with a millitary post every half mile to stop people from going over the border by land, people WILL find a way to go by sea. Where there's a will, there's a way.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by TheGame

Also, even if there was some new berlin wall built down there with a millitary post every half mile to stop people from going over the border by land, people WILL find a way to go by sea.

That's no excuse to punish the children born in the country because their parents broke the law. The children did nothing wrong. It's not their fault.

And yes, I do understand that removing that will take away incentive for poor families to go there - but it really spreads a horrible image about the country as a whole.

The fact is, I honestly don't think the vast majority of people are having kids in the US because of health care [considering they will most likely be from poor countries, and have no way to pay for it anyways, but I'm not saying it isn't a factor] - rather are going there because their country blows so much in comparison that they want to start a new life, in a new place, with new opportunity. You know, the whole idea that North America was practically founded on.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

That's no excuse to punish the children born in the country because their parents broke the law. The children did nothing wrong. It's not their fault.

And yes, I do understand that removing that will take away incentive for poor families to go there - but it really spreads a horrible image about the country as a whole.

The fact is, I honestly don't think the vast majority of people are having kids in the US because of health care [considering they will most likely be from poor countries, and have no way to pay for it anyways, but I'm not saying it isn't a factor] - rather are going there because their country blows so much in comparison that they want to start a new life, in a new place, with new opportunity. You know, the whole idea that North America was practically founded on.

So in your opinion, is illegal immigration even an issue? Because that post makes it sound like you don't really want it to stop, or like you're unwilling to take the proper steps to prevent it.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by TheGame

So in your opinion, is illegal immigration even an issue? Because that post makes it sound like you don't really want it to stop, or like you're unwilling to take the proper steps to prevent it.

Uhh...what.

I haven't said anything about agreeing with illegal immigration.
I can only assume you're saying that I might agree with it because I haven't said I disagreed with it.

So while I'm saying I disagree with illegal immigration, I'll also say I hate racism, homophobes, religious zealots, murderers and rapists. You know, just so I don't get accused of being a Queer-jew-hating catholic who condones priests raping and murdering little boys. Just covering my bases. Animal cruelty sucks, too. So does destroying the environment. I'm also not a fan of people hunting endangered species, or Space Exploration budget cuts. I don't like North Korea threatening nukes, and I don't like people forcing children to be soldiers in Africa.

Just to be clear.

I've stated - you shouldn't remove the incentives. You should solve the problem. This gets them to feel like they've accomplished something [if it goes through], when really they haven't.

And if you're going to remove incentives, go all or nothing, don't pick and choose. Lower wages, remove housing. Make English mandatory for everything.


But honestly - and I mean this in the nicest way possible - if you can't pick up what I'm saying [because I've said it a couple times ridiculously clearly] then I definitely can't explain "I don't agree with removing it, because the children technically did nothing wrong, and it's unfair to punish them for their parents mistakes" any more than I have.

If someone is born in your country, you are that nationality. It's all you've ever been.
A faster solution would be to deport the family after birth if you find them giving birth in your hospital when they arrived there illegally. Removing citizenship is not the way to do it.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

If someone is born in your country, you are that nationality. It's all you've ever been.
A faster solution would be to deport the family after birth if you find them giving birth in your hospital when they arrived there illegally. Removing citizenship is not the way to do it.

How is that punishing the child? The way the system is set up now, society is being punished for giving illegals that incentive. Imagine if there was a law that stated "if a child is born on your property, it is the property owner's responceability." And some random chick happened to break into your back yard illegally and have a child in your back yard. She goes to jail or whatever, but since it's your property you have to pay for the child's healthcare, schooling, etc. Would that be fair?

I know it's different because it's a country vs a single household, but it is the same in a way... because in both cases you're taking responceability for a child who got onto your property by illegal means. And I really don't think that it'd be bad for our image if that law was changed.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by TheGame

How is that punishing the child? The way the system is set up now, society is being punished for giving illegals that incentive. Imagine if there was a law that stated "if a child is born on your property, it is the property owner's responceability." And some random chick happened to break into your back yard illegally and have a child in your back yard. She goes to jail or whatever, but since it's your property you have to pay for the child's healthcare, schooling, etc. Would that be fair?

It would be fair if for hundreds of years I invited people to my house with promise that if they gave birth on my property I would take care of their family. Regardless of the fact this woman broke into my house to give birth, she gave birth a child. A human being. Now, since she is there illegally, I will deal with her separately. However, since the child was born on my property [for the relevance of this metaphor] I will take care of that child. Because that child is innocent, and started being a human-being in my house. If that lady brought already born children into my house without asking me, that is completely different. But if someone breaks into your house [in the hopes of not doing anything malicious] and starts giving birth, you'd have to be really cold-hearted person not to help. I wouldn't say "Okay lady, you broke into my house and gave birth. Now, I won't take care of your child. But see all these other children who were born in my house, who's mothers I invited in? I'm going to be taking perfect care of them. Your kid, though - will have to work extra hard and take exams to be classified as the same thing as these kids here."

Edit: And even if my house is packed with families whom I have invited in, and people who have broken in to give birth - that is no excuse not to take care of the children, and treat them the exact same way I'd treat any other child in my house. Everyone is the same, and everyone is equal. Especially a child who had no decision in the breaking into my house scenario.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

It would be fair if for hundreds of years I invited people to my house with promise that if they gave birth on my property I would take care of their family.

What if it wasn't a problem before and most of the women asked for the "hundreds of years" before hand (or in the case of America, the women didn't even ask and were FORCED to come here and do it), but now you're suddently getting a ton of people doing it for malicious reasons to dump their child off on you? So before it wasn't a big issue, but now it's becoming a big issue because you're suddenly getting all of these "anchor babies" as an unintended result?

This is why I question if you think illegal immigration is a problem or not. If you think it's a problem now, then removing that incentive to have them come onto your property has to make SOME sense.

I don't know, maybe I'm just being more selfish about this whole thing.

[Typhoid]

Originally Posted by TheGame

What if it wasn't a problem before and most of the women asked for the "hundreds of years" before hand (or in the case of America, the women didn't even ask and were FORCED to come here and do it), but now you're suddently getting a ton of people doing it for malicious reasons to dump their child off on you? So before it wasn't a big issue, but now it's becoming a big issue because you're suddenly getting all of these "anchor babies" as an unintended result?

They're still innocent kids who deserve every right as every other kid born in the country. The children have NOTHING to do with it. Don't make their life harder because of their parents mistakes.

This is why I question if you think illegal immigration is a problem or not.

Of course I think it's a problem. But I would solve the problem, not remove reasons for them to come into my house while not doing anything to stop them from getting in. 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.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

Of course I think it's a problem. But I would solve the problem, not remove reasons for them to come into my house while not doing anything to stop them from getting in. 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.

In other words, you'd do exactly what the US has been trying and failing at for hundreds of years. And if you think we're not putting the bouncers in place hard enough, you might agree with the Arizona approach....

No matter what, if incentives aren't removed, people will still get in... Force isn't always the best answer. Look at the drug war... it's not going to end until certain drugs are made legal. Until then it's just gonna be an endless fight that will never be won, and the drugs will be available anyway. No matter how much millitary you want to send down there, people will get in anyway, and there will be anchor babies no matter what.... because the incentive is still there.