America needs a NEW Constitutional Amendment!

No More Anchor Babies

Published on June 27, 2007 By Moderateman In US Domestic

Anchor babies have long been a sneaky way for Illegal Aliens to break the law by coming across the border Pregnant and give birth in America so the baby become a citizen taking advantage of the fourteenth Amendment.

It shows their contempt for America and her laws by taking advantage, having a BABY WHICH AUTOMATICALLY BECOMES A CITIZEN, and allows the Illegals to stay so we do not break the family up.

ENOUGH I SAY! We need to Amend the fourteenth Amendment and stop giving Citizenship to babies of illegal Aliens, forcing them to leave, this madness must stop. Put this to a vote to the American People. Let the people decide if we want this archaic law to continue. The law was written after the Dredd Scott decision, making sure that slaves born in America were citizens of the country, it has outlived its usefulness.

I for one would vote that we ban this law and send the entire family back to where they came from no matter when it is.

Enough of these escape clauses for Illegal aliens to take advantage of. Enough of fair play, for they do not play fair. they lie, cheat, SOME STEAL and still they get to reap the benefits of American citizenship while not being citizens! Enough is enough already! it is time to stand up and say if you are not going to come to America Legally, you will be deported, if you get caught a second time you will be sent to prison, then deported. To many Illegals are using this Amendment to weasel their way into America to stay, and they are taught how to use this by the Mexican Government to top it off.

Comments (Page 3)

danielost

on Jun 28, 2007

Nope, They do not let criminals make profit from their crimes when caught, for instance a criminal behind bars cannot write a book about his crime and make money. An Illegal alien is a lawbreaker, why should the child be allowed to be an American just because it was born here when it started with the parents breaking the law in the first place?

BECAUSE THAT IS THE LAW IF YOUR BORN HERE YOUR AN AMERICAN

further if your born in an American embassy your an American.

further if one of your parents is an American your an American.

i was trying to give a solution that would be in the current laws

the child did not brake any laws because of where he/she was born

as such you cannot punish the innocent for what the guilty have done.

the mother broke the law and as such she should be deported the child would have to go with the mother because we don't want to brake up families when said child reaches 18. as we do with war babies the child will have to decide if he/she is an American or other

danielost

on Jun 28, 2007

Moderateman

on Jun 28, 2007

danielostJune 28, 2007 15:29:18

BECAUSE THAT IS THE LAW IF YOUR BORN HERE YOUR AN AMERICAN

further if your born in an American embassy your an American.

Please do not scream at me I am not stupid and I know what you just typed because if you bothered to read you would see I stated the same exact thing.
Which is why we need an amendment to stop this from happening, People sneaking across our borders, breaking the law, then having a child, and being rewarded by the child being a citizen and the parents being allowed to stay.

Now would you please learn how to use spell check?

danielost

on Jun 28, 2007

well with your amendment

you punish that child that is born on an airplane at an airport. that child is also an American citizen.

and that is what is wrong with a constitutional amendment.

people not intended to get hurt by it. will get hurt by it. just like the amendment to outlaw the defacing of the flag.

under certain circumstances you are supposed to burn the flag. that would be outlawed with said amendment.

amendments are not supposed to affect only one group of people that is why the era will never make it.

all we have to do is enforce the current laws not make more. how many laws do you want to ignore anyways.

Moderateman

on Jun 28, 2007

Reply By: danielost

danie, danie, danie. please make sense. I do not want to ignore any laws, where do I say that? where do you come up with these conclusions from?

Not from anything I type, for sure.

danielost

on Jun 28, 2007

no you just want to make up a new law to cover something that another law has already been made to cover just like the congress is trying to do

Moderateman

on Jun 28, 2007

danielostJune 28, 2007 21:30:20

no you just want to make up a new law to cover something that another law has already been made to cover just like the congress is trying to do

Danie, child, please do NOT tell me what I am thinking. you are coming close to annoying me. Usually I am very gentle with children, BUT you are close to pushing me over the edge by your childish insistent behavior. I do not presume to KNOW what you think, please allow me the same respect. You have not a clue to what goes through my head, how I think, who I am, or what I stand for.
Now do what your name suggests, and danie{get}lost

danielost

on Jun 29, 2007

OK your words

we need a constitutional amendment to stop illegal women from coming to the USA and having babies and getting us citizenship

OK but we have what 38 laws right now to keep deporting illegal aliens as soon as they are found.

we have border patrol agents sitting in prison for defending themselves. from attacks from illegal aliens.

if we cannot/will not enforce the current 38 laws what makes you think that we will/can enforce another one.

and your amendment would punish the innocent you know that child who didn't have a choice.

but never mind all of that we just want to exclude everyone from our party.

the original reason for the illegal alien status was so that the farmers in the border states could have cheap labor. other wise why aren't there similar laws and enforcement on the Canadian border.

what i am saying is you don't give mom citizenship just because her baby was born here. you deport them both and when the child turns 18 he/she can choose to come back or stay where they are.

this is what we do with war babies. i am assuming you know what a war baby is.

we do not need any more laws to ignore. i think 38 ignored laws are enough

drmiler

on Jun 29, 2007

and your amendment would punish the innocent you know that child who didn't have a choice.

The child may not have had a choice but, HIS PARENTS DID! You are just being obtuse. Obscenely so. Look at it correctly. His parents broke the US law by coming here illegally. We then give the child citizenship, but that's cool. But then his parents who BROKE THE LAW get to stay too, because lord only knows we don't want to break up the family.

All that is doing is taking a piss on US laws. And the illegals KNOW it and exploit it. What you're talking about is rewarding someone who most definitely and knowingly broke the law. Where is the justice in that?

Tova7

on Jun 29, 2007

Didn't read all comments...so if I repeat sorry.

I want this to be voted on by the American people MM. I don't think anchor babies should be citizens. That's just begging pregnant illegals to come here and have the baby at tax payer expense usually.

I understand there was a time for it. But the time has passed.

Moderateman

on Jun 29, 2007

Reply By: danielostPosted: Friday, June 29, 2007
OK your words

we need a constitutional amendment to stop illegal women from coming to the USA and having babies and getting us citizenship

OK but we have what 38 laws right now to keep deporting illegal aliens as soon as they are found.

we have border patrol agents sitting in prison for defending themselves. from attacks from illegal aliens.

if we cannot/will not enforce the current 38 laws what makes you think that we will/can enforce another one.

and your amendment would punish the innocent you know that child who didn't have a choice.

but never mind all of that we just want to exclude everyone from our party.

the original reason for the illegal alien status was so that the farmers in the border states could have cheap labor. other wise why aren't there similar laws and enforcement on the Canadian border.

what i am saying is you don't give mom citizenship just because her baby was born here. you deport them both and when the child turns 18 he/she can choose to come back or stay where they are.

this is what we do with war babies. i am assuming you know what a war baby is.

we do not need any more laws to ignore. i think 38 ignored laws are enough

Now this reply make alot of sense, I understand where you were going, a much better and clearer presentation.

you are right in the sense we do not enforce the 38 laws already on the books, BUT an amendment would take away the citizenship of the child of the illegal alien, that's what I was getting at. Making it possible IF we ever start enforcing those laws to deport the entire family, and not have the excuse of "we have an anchor baby, a american citizen child that holds US ALL here.

Moderateman

on Jun 29, 2007

Reply By: drmilerPosted: Friday, June 29, 2007
and your amendment would punish the innocent you know that child who didn't have a choice.

The child may not have had a choice but, HIS PARENTS DID! You are just being obtuse. Obscenely so. Look at it correctly. His parents broke the US law by coming here illegally. We then give the child citizenship, but that's cool. But then his parents who BROKE THE LAW get to stay too, because lord only knows we don't want to break up the family.

All that is doing is taking a piss on US laws. And the illegals KNOW it and exploit it. What you're talking about is rewarding someone who most definitely and knowingly broke the law. Where is the justice in that?

my points exactly.

Moderateman

on Jun 29, 2007

Reply By: Tova7Posted: Friday, June 29, 2007
Didn't read all comments...so if I repeat sorry.

I want this to be voted on by the American people MM. I don't think anchor babies should be citizens. That's just begging pregnant illegals to come here and have the baby at tax payer expense usually.

I understand there was a time for it. But the time has passed.

the time for that was in the 1800's But that is why we have Amendments to fix mistakes.

danielost

on Jun 29, 2007

an amendment would take away the citizenship of the child of the illegal alien

and again you want to punish the innocent along with the guilty

this is what happened with the duke lacros team

because three people were charged the entire team lost a year

because everyone knew that these three people were guilty well remember all that crap

now what i said was IF they are guilty then they need to throw the book at them

my idea punishes the innocent too but i at least give them a chance at a reprieve

Demosthenes Locke

on Jun 29, 2007

and again you want to punish the innocent along with the guilty

How precisely is this punishment? Changing the rules for granting citizenship isn't a punishment to anyone. Explain why someone born on US soil should necessarily be a US citizen by default. If your only answer is that it has always been that way, then that is not a reason, as there isn't a rational basis to this argument.

Guilt or innocence of the child has nothing to do with it. Not conferring a benefit to someone doesn't constitute punishment, provided it is done consistently.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!