Chronicles Of The Trump-Vance Administration

Hammerdrill said:
There were no illegal aliens at the time, so no, there is no argument there. The history is clear, the reason the 14th was crafted, it was very specific in its approach, because it was dealing with a very specific situation. If a person was subject to the jurisdiction of another country, their children would not be citizens of this country.
Click to expand...
Republicans hate people end of story.
 
Guillotine said:
Because men of science like Jefferson and Franklin believed 250 years into the future we'd still be using flintlocks!

THAT is high level P.r.o.b.e.s.e. stupid.
Click to expand...
And the men of science who wrote the 14th did not distinguish between birthplaces of parents.
 
Hammerdrill said:
There were no illegal aliens at the time, so no, there is no argument there. The history is clear, the reason the 14th was crafted, it was very specific in its approach, because it was dealing with a very specific situation.
Click to expand...
The 14th is not written with the restriction you state. It makes no reference to the specifics you desire.
Hammerdrill said:
If a person was subject to the jurisdiction of another country, their children would not be citizens of this country.
Click to expand...
If this was true, anybody with dual citizenship would never give birth to US citizens.
 
ProV1 said:
The 14th is not written with the restriction you state. It makes no reference to the specifics you desire.

If this was true, anybody with dual citizenship would never give birth to US citizens.
Click to expand...
It was written specifically for slaves. There is no getting past that as much as you would like to. It was and never has been about allowing illegals to produce citizens here. Very few countries have birthright citizenship. I wonder why that is.
 
Hammerdrill said:
It was written specifically for slaves.
Click to expand...
Can you offer the text of the amendment that specifies slaves. Can you comment on the existing Supreme Court precedent that 100% refutes your uninformed opinion?
Hammerdrill said:
There is no getting past that as much as you would like to. It was and never has been about allowing illegals to produce citizens here. Very few countries have birthright citizenship. I wonder why that is.
Click to expand...
There are many countries that do not have the protections we have. Do you think that should be determinant of our constitution? My guess is you don't apply that rationale to the 2nd amendment?

On a side note, should I take you ignoring my comment on dual citizenship as agreement that your comment on jurisdiction by another country was hogwash?
 
ProV1 said:
Can you offer the text of the amendment that specifies slaves. Can you comment on the existing Supreme Court precedent that 100% refutes your uninformed opinion?

There are many countries that do not have the protections we have. Do you think that should be determinant of our constitution? My guess is you don't apply that rationale to the 2nd amendment?

On a side note, should I take you ignoring my comment on dual citizenship as agreement that your comment on jurisdiction by another country was hogwash?
Click to expand...
The Supreme Court decision you referenced specifically excluded illegals. Dual citizenship, as in a citizen of the US and another country? Of course those offspring would be US citizens.
 
Hammerdrill said:
The Supreme Court decision you referenced specifically excluded illegals.
Click to expand...
I don't believe the opinion made any reference to legal status of parents. Maybe you can show me the text you are talking about?
Hammerdrill said:
Dual citizenship, as in a citizen of the US and another country? Of course those offspring would be US citizens.
Click to expand...
Great. That is not what you said but glad you came to the proper conclusion.

You talk a lot about "illegals". What do you think the 14th means to children of legal residents?

Should I take you ignoring what other countries do as agreement that we should not make that a determinant in our constitution?
 
ProV1 said:
And the men of science who wrote the 14th did not distinguish between birthplaces of parents.
Click to expand...
But they did distinguish between whether the parents were legal permanent residents of the country. It's not their fault that they used wording that you don't understand.
 
lotr10 said:
But they did distinguish between whether the parents were legal permanent residents of the country. It's not their fault that they used wording that you don't understand.
Click to expand...
Can you reference that exact wording because that is not what the Supreme Court said.
 
ProV1 said:
Can you reference that exact wording because that is not what the Supreme Court said.
Click to expand...
I'll go with this interpretation until the current SCOTUS, by a likely 6 - 3 vote, rules that birthright citizenship does not apply when the parents are not here legally or as legal permanent residents. To argue this now, before the SCOTUS rules is just mental masturbation which you may enjoy but I don't.

www.heritage.org

Birthright Citizenship: A Fundamental Misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment

What’s the citizenship status of the children of illegal aliens? That question has spurred quite a debate over the 14th Amendment lately, with the news that several states—including Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oklahoma, Georgia, and South Carolina—may launch efforts to deny automatic citizenship to...
www.heritage.org www.heritage.org
 
Harrycrane said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1866948198259941778
Click to expand...
1000013783.jpg
 
Harrycrane said:
Of course the YRWEC is pro Putin and anti Ukraine as well

https://twitter.com/x/status/1867203449626001710
Click to expand...
It seems like a lot of Ukrainians don't care much for Z either:

thespectator.com

Volodymyr Zelensky’s deepening unpopularity

Voters blame Volodymyr Zelensky for the war’s failures — and do not wish him to play any part in their country’s future
thespectator.com thespectator.com

It will be up to future historians to assess, and for the people of Ukraine to debate, what Zelensky could have done differently to achieve a better outcome. But what is becoming abundantly clear is that, rightly or wrongly, Ukraine’s voters blame Zelensky for the war’s failures — and do not wish him to play any part in their country’s future.

Recent polls suggest that just 22 percent of Ukrainians would vote to re-elect Zelensky for a second term (with just 16 percent marking him as their first choice). According to a poll last month by the Social Monitoring Center in Kyiv, about 60 percent would prefer Zelensky not even to stand at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top