What are your thoughts on Birth Right Citizenship?

Jan 24 109 Comments

I think only babies that have at least one citizen parent at time of birth should receive it.

Otherwise, the little Putins and little Xi Jinpings will continue invading the US with their babies.

It’s called Birth Tourism. There are birth tourism vacation packages for foreigners to come to the US.

What are your thoughts on Birth Right Citizenship?

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
TOP 109 Comments
  • Amazon geehb
    Only if we could use the same logic when Europeans "invaded" this country
    Jan 24 42
    • OpenTable Meliodas
      Yet, their governments were recognized and have sovereignty to this day.
      Jan 25
    • Microsoft Decius Mus
      Only after we taught the tribes how to govern themselves. Their constitutions are very European. You gonna join one of those stellar Indian nations? Nope, you’re gonna stay in white western culture, which you know is the best.
      Jan 25
    • Broadcom Ltd. citric
      Guys chill. Just answer the original question asked else STFU
      Jan 25
    • Amazon thfsdg
      You can't expect much from a country that elects some one like Trump as a president.
      Jan 25
    • Broadcom Ltd. Jackiechen
      Wait for his re-election
      Jan 25
  • TripAdvisor owlwise
    Most of the people who do birth right tourism actually tend to be pretty rich. It's not cheap to have babies in the US.

    And don't we want rich people coming to the US?
    Jan 24 5
    • Amazon TRuc81
      Take a look at Vancouver before you ask this 😂
      Jan 25
    • TripAdvisor owlwise
      We certainly shouldn't have them congregate in one area but that's a separate argument. Birth right tourism, as ridic as it sounds, is actually good for the US.
      Jan 25
    • Amazon TRuc81
      This will only be used to move money out of countries into the US to be embezzled into housing, it will not be used for jobs etc
      Jan 25
    • TripAdvisor owlwise
      Housing market is 12% of the GDP. Additionally creating US citizens who don't live here still entitles us to their future tax payments.
      Jan 25
    • Amazon TRuc81
      Ah true, I forgot the US taxes citizens internationally
      Jan 27
  • Against it. Child status should be dependent on the status of the parent. We live in the 21st century where anyone can get on a plane and be anywhere in the earth in less than 24 hours. Yet geography of where the mother has the baby give automatic citizenship in the US? Huh?! It’s just so odd.
    Jan 24 47
    • The kid is a citizen. We can’t deport citizens, so either tear the family apart or let them stay. So we let them stay as long as they stay out of trouble. And because the kid is a citizen, the family can qualify for low income housing, food stamps, and welfare. Some programs have restrictions, others don’t. How do you think the population of illegal immigrants grew to 11 million so fast?
      Jan 26
    • OpenTable Meliodas
      You make some factually incorrect statements.

      Pregnant women and nursing mothers could be eligible for certain benefits under the Women-Infants-Children (WIC) program , which provides food and nutrition vouchers to low-income families, if they have a child that was born in the U.S.

      Their children could also enroll in Medicaid, although the undocumented parents could not.

      We don’t think a right should be eliminated, because of false information.
      Jan 26
    • I know. Notice I explicitly said some programs have restrictions. Either way, it’s quite obvious the parents and families don’t leave, yet you assumed their would follow the law and leave. I grew up with many us born kids whose parents are undocumented and here illegally. The benefits are for the kids. And this has been going on for many years. There’s a reason why people argue that birthright citizenship encourages more illegal immigration, but I think it’s more of a function of benefits and available work.

      There was a time when migrant workers came here on temp work visas, lived in labor camps, and went back home after the season was over. Then they gradually decided to stay and being their families here instead and remain undocumented.
      Jan 26
    • OpenTable Meliodas
      So what.

      You still haven’t articulated the harm that warrants the elimination of a right.
      Jan 27
    • Lol. Scroll up. I don’t think I could have described more exhaustively the harms thus far. You on the other hand haven’t provided a single example of how removing it with a DACA solution would cause any harm whatsoever. And until you do, I’m done wasting my time with you.

      To recap the harm. Shady fuck Maternity tourism, increased illegal immigration, increased drain on resources, sowing public distrust and discord.

      It’s clear you’re just looking through the lenses of rose colored goggles. You’re in a bubble. You haven’t grown up with this like I have and the rest of middle America has. Why do you think it was so easy for folks to be fooled by Trump?
      Jan 27
  • Microsoft Big Pun
    Should shut down the government until this is also fixed.
    Jan 24 0
  • Apple procto
    Usually the people who most want to modify the 14th amendment have the worst of intentions. I’d be afraid the new policy could affect my kids if my spouse isn’t a citizen.
    Jan 24 0
  • Amazon TCSlave
    Well it's actually good for the US because of citizenship based taxation. These tourists are nuts, it's a poisonous gift
    Jan 24 0
  • LinkedIn m00’
    I don’t see anything wrong with it
    Jan 24 0
  • OpenTable Meliodas
    If you don’t like it, amend the Constitution.

    And, have a better reason than other countries with less respect for liberty don’t have it.

    History has more than demonstrated the government abuses from having permanent classes of non-citizens.
    Jan 24 3
    • OpenTable Meliodas
      Subject to the jurisdiction thereof means anyone without diplomatic immunity.
      Jan 25
    • OpenTable Meliodas
      People in the country illegally and on tourist visas are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

      If they weren’t subject to the jurisdiction, they wouldn’t be here illegally nor would they need a visa, by definition.

      You are arguing in a way that doesn’t make sense.
      Jan 25
    • OpenTable Meliodas
      Why not use the plain meaning that has existed for 100+ years, rather than inserting extra words that don’t exist?

      As you agree a visitor is conditionally subject to the jurisdiction of the US.
      Jan 25
  • Netflix <empty>
    Who cares? How big of an issue is this even? Especially, considering the lack of consensus of if this is bad/needs change.
    Feb 7 0
  • Broadcom Ltd. citric
    It won’t happen. Once you have that policy it will put burden of parents to prove their citizenship. If you know Court just ruled against asking about if one is citizen or not during census counting.
    Jan 24 1
    • OpenTable Meliodas
      That was because the intent was to under count the population in non-Republican states.
      Jan 24
  • Citadel msnpc
    Democrats only worry because these people actually pay their medical bills, which mean they won’t vote to give government more power to redistribute.
    Jan 25 0

Salary
Comparison

    Real time salary information from verified employees