A message to the lost left: Your foundation is resting on quicksand.

Again, you are talking about citizenship and nationality as being born physically.
That is impossible.

It is impossible for somebody physically born on the African continent to automatically be an African National, for example.
Citizenship is not something that is physically born and they may work against everything that Africa stands for: even the name.

That is their choice and it is guided by their natural experiences;
as they naturally become an African national if they grow up and serve that nation, name, culture., etc...

This is the same in the US.

Simply being physically somewhere does not mean that what you see and experience will be the same as other people in that area.

- It is my right to claim that you are one of my citizens, but that does not mean that YOU will represent ME.
- It is their right to claim that they are one of US, but that does not mean that we will represent THEM.

It is wrong to say that they have no right to claim something about themselves that they believe they are,
just as it is wrong to say that people who claim US Citizenship are entitled to something automatically.

We grant passage to people that are completely unknown to us;
with "fake citizenships" issued by people we KNOW are not a part of our country,
but we deny people that have a history with the US and the support of the US community.

We trust foreign citizenship or aliens that are clearly wielding documents that we do not create,
but we do not trust people who's citizenship was naturally born.

Is there a reason that natural born citizens are not US Citizens?
Why do we demand that these people claim foreign citizenship due to their physical location or their parent's beliefs?

If your parents do something wrong that is harmful to society, then that does not mean that you must support them.
If you are physically present somewhere, because you were physically forced there, then that does not mean you support that place.

 

How about this then. Knock on the door, and see what happens. If the door opens, and you don't have a visa, expect the door to close. If you get here and don't have a visa, expect to be asked to leave.

 

Which law has he not followed?

 

Visas require foreign citizenship, so basically you're saying:

Knock Knock.
"Sorry, but only foreigners are allowed in here."

 

This is a lot of psychobabble and ignores that there are laws held by every nation including ours, that define who is, who is not and how to become a citizen of that nation. Feeling like you are is nice but it doesn't complete the process. I do agree that those children brought here illegally by family and remaining long term should not be returned without their family going with them.

 

I don't care to entertain laws set up by other nations that try to involve themselves in our policies.
Our laws are geared towards natural born citizens and I want these foreign policies out of our administration.

Feeling that you are a citizen is the first step in establishing yourself as a citizen of our country.

We need policies and pathways that allow these people to earn our trust and acceptance without requiring that they claim to be foreign citizens or aliens. Why would we trust known aliens and distrust our own people?

 

Why do you think foreign nationals are entitled to become citizens of USA? Luggit is right. The granting of citizenship is a privilege. Not a right.

 

When I was younger I predicted this would come to pass, but that was somewhat youthful thinking. Now, the separation of Left and Right has become so vitriolic that I am convinced this is where we are heading.

However, it's not necessarily about Left/Right so much as it is about the realities of Urban and Rural America. If the majority of the Dem States did secede, the rest of the country would go to hell in a hand basket. It is the Democratic states that are supporting the rest of the country. There are a variety of factors behind this encompassing education, culture, and resources. It is those issues that Democrats have failed to address and articulate which led to a Trump victory.

 

I never said that being "granted" a citizenship is a right or a privilege.
I've been apposed to foreign nationals and they can remain that way for all I care.

Citizenship is not "granted."
That implies people are enemies, aliens, disloyal, opposite allegiance, etc., by default.

Citizenship is earned and acknowledged.
That does not mean somebody is "not a citizen" or "less than a citizen" until more acknowledgement is "granted."

If we say somebody is born in Russia, then WE have already been affected by a foreign influence called "Russia."
Telling that "somebody" that THEY are Russian Citizens is a way of alienating US people and serving Russia.

It's similar to saying people are "Black" or "Serve Africa" when we see a dark pigment in their skin color.

Just because we observe intelligence about the person that they have no control over,
that does not mean that person is not a citizen or that they need to immigrate or represent a foreign nation.

edit: People are running around alienating each other when they don't even realize that they are under the influence of a foreign policy.
That's concerning (esp. when it's happening at our consulates, embassies, borders, and even within the interior of the 50 states).

 

And? What you have suggested is that you feel you have a right to self determine your citizenship. You don't. You can ask for permission, but you have to declare where you're coming from. Sorry you don't like that part, but it's what literally every nation on the planet requires.

 

You declare where you are coming from when you declare your citizenship.
How do you come from a citizenship that you don't have to begin with?

What you are suggesting is that you have no determination of your loyalties and your allegiance.

 

The 1965 Immigration and Nationalization Act;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/the-enduring-scandal-of-trump-university

 

That regulated our national immigration and quota system. I believe the SCOTUS will find that it does not apply to a legal Presidential order for a pause.

 

There's only one problem. The executive action was never a pause. It was a manufactured crisis intended to have an indefinite extension. Also, since you seem to have selectively picked out what you wanted to read, the act abolishes not just the "quota system", it abolishes the "quota system" based on National origin. Big difference!

 

It has an expiration date so it is a pause. The two acts were dealing with two different situations and the '65 act governs the national immigration program. I don't believe it overrides the President's responsibility for national security

 

Did you care about the Kenyans blatantly nefarious past?

 

A pause that Trump wouldn't hesitate to extend. The man is a dictator. He thinks laws do not apply to him. Lol! Do you really think he fools us?

Trump has already been quoted, and the whole world understands his motive to ban all Muslims. That is the game and everyone knows it. A Muslim ban is unconstitutional, which is what this was.

 

Then why didn't it include all Muslims? I don't really think you are that hard to fool, Obama did it for 8 years.

 

Why? The US Constitution does not apply to non-Americans, which is what prospective Muslim immigrants are.

 

Why would the US want more Muslims when we can see what's going on in Europe? There are many millions who don't share this backward ideology who could live peacefully and happily in their new homes.