Should Anchor babies continue to give their families automatic citizenship

[cidliz2004]

I personally do not think so. After all, the child doesn't choose where he or she is born, the mother/parents do. So, by allowing them citizenship automatically because they managed to illegally enter the U.S. and give birth in the U.S., is to reward criminals. Besides. with SS in trouble, why should we be giving $12,000 annually to families in benefits automatically awarded to these families.

The Frickin Mexican Government is using soldiers to combat volunteers/minutemen guarding their border. Why don't they use their soldiers, to keep the illegals in their own country???????

[Book Lover]

1. A) Your proposal would

require an amendment to the federal constitution; good luck.

B) What $12,000 are you talking about? Specifics, please.

C) What is it to you if someone is born here or not? Why do you care?

[cidliz2004]

8. Benefits to a family that is unemployed

I care about ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION and the drain on our economy, not even talking about National security.

I suppose it is stupid to be against awarding people when they break the law....what was I thinking?

[Book Lover]

10. Which state

grants family benefits to unemployed workers? Are you talking about what used to be called General Assistance? Are you talking about Unemployment Benefits? Also, when you say "drain on our economy," what do you mean? I mean, my assumption is that you mean dollars being wired to Mexico, but am I right?

[LoganW]

30. No state does

it's klan propaganda.

[Book Lover]

33. Thank you!

I was willing to go the long route with this one, but you cut to the chase. Thanks :-)

[UdoKier]

42. Being born is not breaking the law.

If you want the border patrol to be extra-vigilant about deporting pregnant illegals, fine. But once the baby is born, it's an American. Mexicans can also come and marry Americans and become legal. Does that drive you nuts too?

Focus on enforcing the border, not bashing people who come here to escape poverty.

[MADem]

2. It is a topic that deserves discussion

Other nations do not automatically grant citizenship to children born of foreign parents simply by accident (or deliberate intent) of the location of their birth. I read recently that Ireland was cracking down on this sort of thing.

It deserves full debate, without emotion, but that probably won't happen. There will be charges of racism, of anti-immigrant bias, and so on, countered by charges of weakening national security, insecure borders, crushing costs of illegals who do not pay in what they take out, and so on.

I can't say for sure how I feel about it. I'd like to hear the FULL debate, without histronics.

[napi21]

5. You're right. Most foreign gov'ts give citizenship to the children only.

My neice and her husband had 2 children while they were stationed in Japan. Obviously, they were not illegals! Those 2 children have dual citizenship.

I also agree that there should be a lot of very serious discussion about this, and I would hope the outcome would be something like dual sitizenship, but not automatic citizenship for those who broke laws to get here!

[tsuki]

11. I remembered something about this being repealed, but it was the

United Kingdom and Australia that repealed their laws.

[tubbacheez]

3. Brilliant idea. Deport the parents and keep the baby here.

Nothing like more orphans to feed into the sickly, uneducated, politically marginalized, cheap labor force of the next century.


Oh wait, the mom and dad WERE that labor force until you deported them.








Back to the drawing board.

[Lindacooks]

6. LOL! Right on!!

Now freepers are going after the parent-child bond, huh? Not satisfied at trying to weaken the 'holy state' of marriage by allowing family members to intervene??

Jeebus.

[tubbacheez]

7. They're simply missing the big picture

amid all the hardcore stances they're so busy taking.



It's screwing up their sense of priorities.

[Sandpiper]

4. Yeah, damn those fricking Mexicans

They should all be shot.

:eyes:

[Craig3410]

23. Wow; you sound like my mother.

:eyes:

[Lone_Star_Dem]

45. Never fear the minutemen are on the case.

:eyes:

[gollygee]

9. $12,000 annually to families?

where does that come from? My husband is an immigrant and we both had to sign documents saying we understood we would never get any benefits if he moved here unless and until he becomes a citizen. We are not elgible for food stamps, unemployment, welfare, etc. (edited to add: regardless of income) What $12,000 are these folks getting?

[tsuki]

12. If they are illegals, then they do not have sponsors. If they get

status as the parents of a newborn, they still do not have a sponsor. I think it may be a social services loop.

[gollygee]

14. Aaaaah I see

thanks for the clarification :)

[tsuki]

16. I am not sure that is how it works, but like you, I had to sign a load

of paperwork for my spouse to enter, even though we had been married for six years and had a child.

[XemaSab]

13. The deal with Mexico

is they have no social safety net and no tax base. I think Vincente Fox wants Mexicans to come here for work. I bet he's in favor of it, because money wired to Mexico creates jobs in Mexico.

[QC]

17. Yes, as long as Mexico can export its poor, the government there

will not have to deal with things like 60 families owning practically the entire country, corruption, overpopulation, lack of educational opportunities and economic development, etc. It's a pretty good deal for the elites on both sides of the border.

[K-W]

19. Which is the real story here, not the immigrants.

The real story is our rediculous economy and its almost feudal need for cheap labor.

[pinto]

15. Technical point: foreign nationals don't get automatic citizenship on the

birth of their child here. The child is a citizen by birth, not the parents. The parents are still foreign nationals, legally.

Today's Lou Dobbs "anchor baby" segment addressed this somewhat.

It's a hot topic, as you probably know, especially here in the Southwest (I live in CA).

Personally, I support a realistic "immigration summit" among the North, Central and South Americans. One thing we all know to be true -The United States will remain an employment magnet and immigration, legal and illegal will continue. We need to have more than photo ops at the national level.

The latest proposal from a San Diego politician to build a bigger wall on the last 3.5 miles of the border and the activity of the vigilante "Minuteman" group in Arizona are short sighted, in the first instance, and dangerously illegal in the second.

Thanks.

[tsuki]

18. Does Canada have an "anchor baby" problem?

[LoganW]

31. Canada let's most of the worlds poor in with out bitching and moaning

in fact more so than any other nation.

[pinto]

38. Not that I'm aware of.... didn't mean to imply that at all.

(on edit)

Though Canadians, as a part of a summit, might add some much needed common sense to the Northern American point of view...

:thumbsup:

[tsuki]

39. I didn't mean anything by that. It was just an informational

question. :hi:

[shelley806]

20. I agree with you on all points. This was the question of the day on

Lou Dobbs, i think, yesterday. I missed the results, and was very curious about the final vote. Did you happen to catch it?

[K-W]

21. I think we should give them the same attention we give welfare queens

and recognize that it is just another symptom of the larger problems in our society, and the fear it inspires makes it a very useful point to manipulate people with.

Our economy and foriegn policy create a demand for mexican workers, and then we are told they are the reason our economy is messed up.

The reason we dont have enough jobs is because the people responsible for creating jobs are largely unaccountable to the people who need jobs.

It is scapegoating, pure and simple. Obscuring the true causes of the problem.

[gollygee]

26. Great post!

[LoganW]

22. Go repeal the 14th amendment then

The KKK has wanted that since the civil war.

"Besides. with SS in trouble, why should we be giving $12,000 annually to families in benefits automatically awarded to these families."

Frankly, I'd rather pay for a foreign childs medical expenses than your SS. Only certain people put their SS above the well being of a child.

"The Frickin Mexican Government is using soldiers to combat volunteers/minutemen guarding their border"

Oh you mean the racists who want to take a shot at the first brown family they see?

[solinvictus]

24. No, they shouldn't...

the families should still be deported.

[LoganW]

25. Also Mr. Patriot

please go READ the constitution. Only the child NOT the parents get citizenship.

[UdoKier]

43. Yes, but with the child being a citizen, the parents get a green card...

...and the road to citizenship is smoothed considerably. (not that I object to that.)

[RetroLounge]

27. Should we change the US Constution to appease

uninformed right-wing bigots?

I would say No...

RL

[RetroLounge]

28. Lot of Mexicans taking your jobs in Algonquin?

RL

[Sandpiper]

44. Funny that you mention that

I've noticed that the DUers who seem to worry most about "illegal Mexicans" don't happen to live anywhere near the border.

Go figure.

[LoganW]

29. Take a look at the daily cost of Iraq

the right has shifted the focus to the small amount (in comparison) of money spent on immigrants while they invaide foreign nations costing FAR more.

[LoganW]

32. Well looks like a drive by post

nt

[tyedyeto]

34. Where would you rather have your child be born......

a nice, CLEAN hospital in a US border town or a poor Mexican one.

I belong to an organization that is trying to help newborns who are born in Nogales, Mexico, by giving then diapers, blankets and other knitted and crocheted items to wear home (they normally go home wrapped in newspaper!!!!)

And if the baby or mother has any problems, do those hospitals have the neccessary equipment to handle them? Probably not.

I am a humanitarian by nature and prefer to stay that way, thank you very much.

[K-W]

35. How dare you solve a problem when you could blame the victims!!!!!!

You damn commie.

[tyedyeto]

36. I hope that was said with....

:sarcasm:

(I'm definitely sure it was, just wanted an excuse to use the new smiley!)

[tsuki]

37. I applaud your efforts. My child was born in a nice clean hospital.

But today, I see many children being born with only midwives in attendence because they cannot afford the prenatal and hospital care. I worry about the possible problems and lack of equipment.

It is not only in Nogales that their are health care problems. We have them here in the good old USA.

[tyedyeto]

40. Another of the charities the org I belong to is...

a neo-natal unit in Tucson.

You are so right that too many in the US don't have and can't afford decent health care. I know if I had a child right now, I couldn't afford the Dr fees, hospital fees, the tests and everything else that goes along with maternity care. I had my children in the late 70's and early 80's and could barely afford it then.

[UdoKier]

41. What the hell are you talking about?

Since when do people who don't pay into SS get benefits? You are talking about ending a longstanding principle - if you're born here, YOU'RE AN AMERICAN.

Most of these people come here and work, not to have a baby.

I happen to favor pretty strict border controls and deportation of illegals, but what you are proposing is meanspirited and racist. NO.

[ulysses]

46. not at all. we should eat them.

Raargh! I am white America, hear me roar!

:eyes:

[Cuban_Liberal]

47. What the hell???

Pretty 'progressive' post...

:eyes:

[Moderator]

48. locked.

The original poster has had member status revoked.

Please feel free to continue disussion in another thread.

Thanks for your consideration.

DU Mod