Removing the Fourteenth Amendment

[Soxbadger]

I don't think people are seriously discussing changing anything other than the aspect of the rule that allows illegal immigrants to have children here who become citizens.

 

Right and what is the purpose of this?

 

To prevent more "undesirable" people from entering the US, from becoming citizens, from turning America into something "they" dont want.

 

The problem I have is that this is nothing more than a pretext for racism. And if you let them have the first step, where does it end?

 

Im not going to invoke any of the historical slippery slope arguments, because I think we already know them.

 

I will never support any sort of law that denies entry to the United States based on the fact that "they" are from some where else. I will never support any amendment to the constitution that puts up artificial barriers for "them" to become citizens.

 

I only exist today because there were others before me who showed the same compassion as I am willing to show. At one time or another, all of us were "them", the ones that the people who were already here wanted to keep out. They didnt want immigrants from Ireland, they didnt want Eastern Europeans, they didnt want Jews, they didnt want XYZ, for ABC reason.

 

But some, those who were true Americans, accepted us. They realized that the idea of America was bigger than their own personal gain, bigger than hoping that they had the biggest log cabin or the most beautiful horse, that America was about giving everyone a chance, a chance to be somewhere that they could be free.

 

So while it may seem like a "small" change, to me it is a major shift in the entire idea of America. That every time people have tried to alter the constitution to limit the freedoms of "others" the US courts have stood in strong opposition. Whether it was the Chinese in California, the Irish/Jews/Italians in NY, the Mexicans in California/Texas/etc.

 

Those who are born on our soil are no different than me. I am not in the business of digging up the past. They came to America for a reason, to be some where that their children could have a better life.

 

I hope that I can help provide that child with a better life. And the best way for me to be able to do that, is to allow that child full rights as a citizen.

 

But then again, I dont believe that the US should have artificial quotas or try and restrict immigration. I believe that as long as the person wants to come to the US, agrees to follow the laws of the US and is willing to pay taxes, etc., that they should be allowed in the US and eventually be allowed to be citizens.

 

When times are tough, that is when it is the easiest to turn on "others". It is out of times of despair that the darkest moments in human history have occurred.

 

We can not let our own despair turn us, we must rise above it. The United States is unique. We are an experiment. It is up to use to prevent the experiments failure.

 

We can not go down this road, it is my belief that we must go the opposite way. We must allow more immigration, we must allow easier paths to citizenship, we must get rid of this antiquated idea of "illegal alien".

 

We are all people. We all just want the opportunity to have the best life possible.

 

I refuse to take part in any scheme, plot or movement to restrict some one else's ability to have that similar opportunity. Everyone in the world deserves the same chance as me. If they want to come to the US, I welcome them, I hope that they succeed.

 

 

[whitesoxfan101]

Right and what is the purpose of this?

 

To prevent more "undesirable" people from entering the US, from becoming citizens, from turning America into something "they" dont want.

 

The problem I have is that this is nothing more than a pretext for racism. And if you let them have the first step, where does it end?

 

Im not going to invoke any of the historical slippery slope arguments, because I think we already know them.

 

I will never support any sort of law that denies entry to the United States based on the fact that "they" are from some where else. I will never support any amendment to the constitution that puts up artificial barriers for "them" to become citizens.

 

I only exist today because there were others before me who showed the same compassion as I am willing to show. At one time or another, all of us were "them", the ones that the people who were already here wanted to keep out. They didnt want immigrants from Ireland, they didnt want Eastern Europeans, they didnt want Jews, they didnt want XYZ, for ABC reason.

 

But some, those who were true Americans, accepted us. They realized that the idea of America was bigger than their own personal gain, bigger than hoping that they had the biggest log cabin or the most beautiful horse, that America was about giving everyone a chance, a chance to be somewhere that they could be free.

 

So while it may seem like a "small" change, to me it is a major shift in the entire idea of America. That every time people have tried to alter the constitution to limit the freedoms of "others" the US courts have stood in strong opposition. Whether it was the Chinese in California, the Irish/Jews/Italians in NY, the Mexicans in California/Texas/etc.

 

Those who are born on our soil are no different than me. I am not in the business of digging up the past. They came to America for a reason, to be some where that their children could have a better life.

 

I hope that I can help provide that child with a better life. And the best way for me to be able to do that, is to allow that child full rights as a citizen.

 

But then again, I dont believe that the US should have artificial quotas or try and restrict immigration. I believe that as long as the person wants to come to the US, agrees to follow the laws of the US and is willing to pay taxes, etc., that they should be allowed in the US and eventually be allowed to be citizens.

 

When times are tough, that is when it is the easiest to turn on "others". It is out of times of despair that the darkest moments in human history have occurred.

 

We can not let our own despair turn us, we must rise above it. The United States is unique. We are an experiment. It is up to use to prevent the experiments failure.

 

We can not go down this road, it is my belief that we must go the opposite way. We must allow more immigration, we must allow easier paths to citizenship, we must get rid of this antiquated idea of "illegal alien".

 

We are all people. We all just want the opportunity to have the best life possible.

 

I refuse to take part in any scheme, plot or movement to restrict some one else's ability to have that similar opportunity. Everyone in the world deserves the same chance as me. If they want to come to the US, I welcome them, I hope that they succeed.

 

Another good post, and I especially like the bolded part because at some point, WE (or our ancestors) were "they" or "them". Unless of course, you're an American Indian, but sadly our government took care of most of them in the past.

Edited August 11, 2010 by whitesoxfan101

[Balta1701]

I just think its funny that this is one of those topics where being reasonable, or trying to come up with a positive change instead of going all out one way or the other, seems to be impossible.

No one has justified yet in this thread that there needs to be change or that any change would actually be a net positive.

[Jenksismyhero]

People should be granted citizenship just because they are born here.

 

People should be able to build a Mosque next to the site of the Twin Towers. (eventhough its not really next to the site)

 

We once were a city upon a hill, where we were the model of free society. But we inch closer to being nothing more than what we allegedly despise.

 

Everyone who is born in America, deserves to be a citizen. But then again I believe the the idea of America was to be a place where those who are persecuted, those who seek a better life, would be free to join whenever they please. I dont agree with immigration quotas, I dont agree with refusing to allow people to come to America to seek a better life.

 

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,

With conquering limbs astride from land to land;

Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame

Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name

Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand

Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command

The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

 

I understand that people want to have advantages and not let other people immigrate here and potentially compete with them for jobs and benefits. But is that not the American way? Are we not capitalists? Do we not believe in competition and that the hardest and best working will rise to the top?

To me that is America. And it actually bothers me to see that people can claim to care about freedom, equality, etc. but at the same time do everything in their power to prevent all people from having that.

 

Can you please cite to the time period you're talking about?

 

 

Edited August 11, 2010 by Jenksismybitch

[whitesoxfan101]

Can you please cite to the time period you're talking about?

 

I'm not sure we were ever truly a free society. But I find it hard to argue with his point that we're inching closer to what we despise, particularly in regards to our freedoms. And I'm not sure why you bolded the 2nd point you did, I think he's right there too.

Edited August 11, 2010 by whitesoxfan101

[Balta1701]

Can you please cite to the time period you're talking about?

I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still.

President Ronald Reagan, farewell address, 1989.

[Jenksismyhero]

 

 

The problem I have is that this is nothing more than a pretext for racism. And if you let them have the first step, where does it end?

 

It has nothing to do with race, it's based on citizenry.

 

I will never support any sort of law that denies entry to the United States based on the fact that "they" are from some where else. I will never support any amendment to the constitution that puts up artificial barriers for "them" to become citizens.

 

Then why have ANY requirements, INCLUDING having to be born here?

 

But then again, I dont believe that the US should have artificial quotas or try and restrict immigration. I believe that as long as the person wants to come to the US, agrees to follow the laws of the US and is willing to pay taxes, etc., that they should be allowed in the US and eventually be allowed to be citizens.

 

So, if they don't, they shouldn't be given that right? Some don't pay taxes, but still want to be citizens. And it's not "eventually," in this case, it's immediate.

 

We can not go down this road, it is my belief that we must go the opposite way. We must allow more immigration, we must allow easier paths to citizenship, we must get rid of this antiquated idea of "illegal alien".

 

Yes, because "citizen" has no meaning or benefit.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

No one has justified yet in this thread that there needs to be change or that any change would actually be a net positive.

 

How about saving the future of our social services for people who actually have paid into them here and need them?

[southsider2k5]

President Ronald Reagan, farewell address, 1989.

 

It is ironic to quote Ronny, since it was his 1986 amnesty that showed us what a complete failure that is historically.

[Balta1701]

How about saving the future of our social services for people who actually have paid into them here and need them?

So...the kid who is born here as a citizen, grown up here, lives here his or her whole life as a citizen...does not pay into those social service programs?

 

OTOH, I know of a place that we're wasting something like $11 billion a year that might be able to cover more than the cost you're concerned about. Customs and Border Patrol.

[Soxbadger]

Well city upon a hill is one of the most famous statements made by John Winthrop. The purpose of the speech was to basically tell those on his ship that while they were escaping from persecution in the Old World, it would be up to them to set the precedent of what would be the new world. That everyone would be watching them, and if they failed, it would be proof of their gods failure.

 

In time the US has become the city upon the hill in terms of freedom. We are the longest standing modern republic. We are the precursor to the French revolution. We are the country who stands for the idea that people can be free and it can work. If the US was to fail, it would support the idea that you can not be free like the US. That you have to be a country where the govt restricts freedom in order to succeed.

 

Its probably one of the most influential phrases in American history and has been used by both John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan. Its just a very powerful image, that the US was founded on this idea that we were going to be the model for the rest of the world, the city that they could all look to.

 

So as for the time period (and I dont even understand the relevance of the question) it would be 1776 through present. While there have been some bumps in the road, the United States has stood as a govt. for the people and by the people. And some times we make mistakes, but I hope that w e learn from them, and make sure that they are never repeated.

 

That is all we can do.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Right and what is the purpose of this?

 

To prevent more "undesirable" people from entering the US, from becoming citizens, from turning America into something "they" dont want.

 

The problem I have is that this is nothing more than a pretext for racism. And if you let them have the first step, where does it end?

 

I'm pretty sure you just called me a racist, which is laughable.

 

No, the reason to explore this (at least for me - certainly SOME of these voices in the debate are racist) is simple. Citizenship is this country's single greatest commodity. And the more you flood the country with that commodity, the less value it has, NOT because it means "undesirable" people are here, but because there are limits to the OTHER resources we have. Jobs, government services, water/land/natural resources, money, etc.

 

Just as I have said in here in many ways that you HAVE to be careful with the consumption of natural resources if you want society to thrive, similarly, you HAVE to be careful of the rate at which people are coming into the country to access them.

 

The U.S. is the place more people want to live than anywhere on Earth, far and away. We have something really great going here, even with its flaws. If you just fling open the doors with no restrictions to access and citizenship whatsoever, you will get huge floods of people that will inevitably make life more difficult for everyone here. This is why we have restrictions on citizenship and visitation, just like every country on earth (or close) does.

 

So... since most people would agree that SOME sort of controls must be in place... the debate is not something ethereal and idealistic as you seem to think. What it really is, is deciding where you want that line to be. And all I'm saying is, maybe when deciding to draw that line, you should make life EASIER for the immigrants who do things right, and HARDER for those who don't.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I'm not sure we were ever truly a free society. But I find it hard to argue with his point that we're inching closer to what we despise, particularly in regards to our freedoms. And I'm not sure why you bolded the 2nd point you did, I think he's right there too.

 

How are we getting closer to something we've always been? Supplant immigrant in this situation (or brown people, since a lot of you think this is all about hating on them only) with black, irish, german, catholic, jew, whatever.

[Balta1701]

No, the reason to explore this (at least for me - certainly SOME of these voices in the debate are racist) is simple. Citizenship is this country's single greatest commodity. And the more you flood the country with that commodity, the less value it has, NOT because it means "undesirable" people are here, but because there are limits to the OTHER resources we have. Jobs, government services, water/land/natural resources, money, etc.

NSS, a lot of those things you list are entirely renewable resources...because they're paid for by the people who are already here. There's not just a finite supply of jobs or money or government services...they're paid for and created by the people who are here who choose to advance or cut back on them.

[southsider2k5]

So...the kid who is born here as a citizen, grown up here, lives here his or her whole life as a citizen...does not pay into those social service programs?

 

Maybe, maybe not. If they are getting paid cash, no.

 

At the end of the day, having a way to control costs is step number one in saving programs like social security, medicare, and forced health care. Having no mechanism at all to control the amount of people going into the programs is going to bankrupt them.

[Balta1701]

How are we getting closer to something we've always been? Supplant immigrant in this situation (or brown people, since a lot of you think this is all about hating on them only) with black, irish, german, catholic, jew, whatever.

So, it's OK to distrust and beat up Mexicans because we used to do that to the Irish?

[whitesoxfan101]

How are we getting closer to something we've always been? Supplant immigrant in this situation (or brown people, since a lot of you think this is all about hating on them only) with black, irish, german, catholic, jew, whatever.

 

I think our getting closer to something we despise doesn't necessarily relate a great deal to the immigration issue, that was more of an off topic political point.

[Balta1701]

At the end of the day, having a way to control costs is step number one in saving programs like social security, medicare, and forced health care. Having no mechanism at all to control the amount of people going into the programs is going to bankrupt them.

 

You guys kinda gave up the right to talk about cost controls in health care without me cracking up last year.

[NorthSideSox72]

NSS, a lot of those things you list are entirely renewable resources...because they're paid for by the people who are already here. There's not just a finite supply of jobs or money or government services...they're paid for and created by the people who are here who choose to advance or cut back on them.

Do you really think that for each person coming into the country, that there is a perfect slide in the curve of quantity and quality of those other commodities? Or that it is instantaneous in nature?

 

Further, if people are here illegally, they only pay in PART of the tax regime, if any. So again, they don't push up the other side with perfect efficiency. Therefore there is leakage and weakness economically.

 

[Balta1701]

Further, if people are here illegally, they only pay in PART of the tax regime, if any. So again, they don't push up the other side with perfect efficiency. Therefore there is leakage and weakness economically.

Then the solution is to bring them into the full system, not to turn our backs on them.

[southsider2k5]

Do you really think that for each person coming into the country, that there is a perfect slide in the curve of quantity and quality of those other commodities? Or that it is instantaneous in nature?

 

Further, if people are here illegally, they only pay in PART of the tax regime, if any. So again, they don't push up the other side with perfect efficiency. Therefore there is leakage and weakness economically.

 

Not to mention by nature that people who are entering here illegally, are usually in the poorest segments, which means the rest of us have more cost to pick up.

[southsider2k5]

 

You guys kinda gave up the right to talk about cost controls in health care without me cracking up last year.

 

You don't agree that more people means more cost?

[NorthSideSox72]

Then the solution is to bring them into the full system, not to turn our backs on them.

And I have always agreed with that - having a more sensical program for bringing in people to work and eventually become citizens. That, however, is not the same as saying everyone and anyone can come in at will. Again, I think even you would have to admit that there HAVE to be controls, or the consequences would be dire. Therefore, I wish you would stop speaking in absolutes, and talk in terms of reality - there has to be a line, there have to be controls, so where and how do we implement them?

 

[Rex Kickass]

Maybe, maybe not. If they are getting paid cash, no.

 

At the end of the day, having a way to control costs is step number one in saving programs like social security, medicare, and forced health care. Having no mechanism at all to control the amount of people going into the programs is going to bankrupt them.

 

Are you really arguing that the 14th amendment needs to be altered or ignored to deny citizenship to children born of non-US citizens because they might work under the table one day?

 

Because if that's the case, half of native born Brooklyn needs to turn in their passports.

[southsider2k5]

Are you really arguing that the 14th amendment needs to be altered or ignored to deny citizenship to children born of non-US citizens because they might work under the table one day?

 

Because if that's the case, half of native born Brooklyn needs to turn in their passports.

 

I answered Baltas first question, which had nothing to do with that.