What immigration does to children... Stateless Children Doomed to Life of Discrimination and Despair November 03, 2015 The U.N. refugee agency said a global 10-year campaign launched one year ago to end statelessness is making progress, but not enough. See also: From Ireland to Mexico, Maps Show Changing Face of US Immigrants November 2nd, 2015 - From Ireland and Germany to Italy and Mexico, a new series of maps illustrates changing trends in immigration to the United States from 1850 until 2013.
Well if their parents aren't citizens we can deport them and they can come back when they're adults if they like...
That is a horrible strategy. Suppose we could throw out millions of undocumented foreigners. They take their American born children with them. In a few years, with birth certificates and National ID Cards in hand those MILLIONS come to the border and we have to let them in. Now, they have no family support system, no education ... and many will have lost their command of the English language. These millions of young will have no job skills and no understanding of the laws and customs of this country. Adding insult to injury, after a while, those people would be able to get their parents back into the United States. The real solution is extreme and would never be done. We have to create a Guest Worker program with no automatic path to citizenship OR we will have given the liberals the green light to grant absolute amnesty and end the debate on their terms. We got into this situation on an incremental basis and that's the only way back out. Well, that's the only way unless the right takes a much more drastic approach that doesn't include increasing the size, power and / or scope of government. The extreme position of mass deportations and walls around the border will only make us a POLICE STATE, empower a centralized federal government and take away OUR Liberties with little to no effect on the foreign population.
We have multiple guest worker programs. For example the H2-A visa is a temporary program for agricultural workers. Adding a few more guest worker programs won't solve the problem because employers prefer to pay illegals peanuts rather than pay a decent wage to legal temp workers.
Most of the people that are in the U.S. without papers are not working agricultural jobs. The current caps we have would not include just the undocumented foreigners in metro Atlanta, much less the rest of the United States. Yeah, a lot of employers want to hire people and pay dirt wages. But, that's another thread. The reality is that for most people in this country without papers, there simply was not proper "in" that they could have pursued. It's really a bad situation for the U.S. We cannot keep foreigners from coming here; we can't keep employers from giving the jobs they create to the individual of their choosing; we can't offer citizenship to every person that washes up on our shores.
Immigration is supposed to be for our benefit, not for the benefit of the rest of the world. So I don't care that some people couldn't come up with a proper "in." There are ways to keep them out, but the powers that be like having a separate working class that have no legal rights.
Lil Mike, All men have an unalienable Right to Liberty. That is much different from citizenship. The only reason I care that some people have a proper "in" to come here is due to an admonition from one of our founding fathers: "An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself". Thomas Paine Every law that has been passed under the pretext of saving us from so - called "illegal aliens" has been used against Americans more times than foreigners. We pass laws that jeopardize the Liberties of others and the powers that be use those laws against us. But, if Guest Workers benefit business, then they can argue the same Rights as you and the same benefit that you would argue if the job were reserved for you. All of that does not answer the dilemma we're faced with in regards to the children affected by this issue.
Liberty doesn't mean one has the right to go to another country without their consent. How about you go to Mexico without authorization and tell them that you have an unalienable right to liberty and you are just going to stay there and work as long as you want. MOD EDIT - Rule 3
First off, the United States is NOT Mexico. But, rest assured, the "Secure the border" lobby obviously wishes it were. It isn't. It is a country founded on the principle of Liberty AND, when those words were penned in the Declaration of Independence, the colonists were the immigrants. The logical conclusion is that traveling through an area and even engaging in the free market are unalienable Rights. You may disagree; however, your opinion is no more valid than mine. Let's just agree to disagree and move along. Next, the so - called "Patriot Act" IS related to so - called "illegal immigration." There is that sub section of the so - called "Patriot Act" that deals with Enhanced Border Security - even that nutty wall around America idea is a part of the so - called "Patriot Act." http://biometrics.nist.gov/cs_links/pact/pact2002.pdf The National ID / REAL ID Act was passed on the pretext of enforcing the so - called "Patriot Act." The doors opening for warrantless searches on the same pretext are related to... yes, they most assuredly are Liquid Reigns. All one has to do is Google the terms together and you can access hundreds of government documents to prove it. Finally, it matters little WHERE Thomas Paine was. The principle is universal. It does not limit itself to France. Your side got the so - called "Patriot Act" passed. It deals with foreigners AND so - called "illegal immigration." Paine's warnings were like Thomas Jefferson said about the truth being self evident. More Americans have been pursued by the laws YOU supported than the people you thought you were targeting. NOTHING you can come up with and try to spin it will change the facts. MOD EDIT - Rule 5/Reply to Deleted
Your claim is that all men have the unalienable right to liberty, Now you are limiting it to just in the US? So much for your claims. I suggest you try reading section IV of the Patriot Act. That "nutty wall" was proposed in 2006, while border infrastructure has been part of law since 1986. Your link fails to prove anything beyond people applying for a US Visa, entry from another country. What matters is the context of the quote. You haven't presented any facts, all you do is make this wild accusation.
An unalienable right to liberty doesn't have anything to do with everyone in the world having a right to come to the US to live and work. If you are making an open borders argument, than it's probably pointless having this, or any discussion, on immigration.
You might be right Lil Mike. It's not like we ought to rely on the people that fought, bled and died in order to secure the blessings of Liberty. If you want to get down and nasty, Lil Mike, BEFORE the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified, the blessings of Liberty only applied to the white race - NOT to some hodge podge collective of the masses as most are willing to accept today. Today the argument shifts from the posterity of the founding fathers to any person that has sought the blessings of a corrupt, de facto (illegal) government hiding behind an illegally ratified Amendment to the Constitution. If you've been "allowed" by the federal government to be here, then it's all cool... right? So, in essence, you don't believe in unalienable Rights? Maybe they only belong to those who have been given permission from some government / God? In your utopia an agricultural concern can have access to low wage foreigners, but the guy who owns a Mickey Ds don't have equal rights with other employers? Are you saying that the government owns the jobs in the United States? Are you thusly entitled to one of those jobs? The 14th Amendment says that if you're born here, you're a U.S. citizen. Do you support that? Are you going to make an original intent argument based on an illegally ratified Amendment? Are you aware that we have office holding politicians in the U.S. that were born to non-citizens? Do you honestly think that the courts will somehow uncitizen those people? Or are you really afraid that I might be right and the courts will rule that children born in the U.S. are citizens regardless of their parents immigration status? And, if it plays out that way, what next? It's great that everybody has an opinion, but what happens when you are over-turned in the courts? What then?
And what does the US Constitution say about Liberty? So we secure those blessings of Liberty for ourselves and our posterity. So the US govt is an illegal govt? I think the govt existed prior to the 14th amendment. Prior to the 14th Amendment the states regulated who entered and who did not, many have it written into their very own constitutions. Even the Articles of Confederation regulated who was allowed to enter. At no point in time does any of our founding documents grant the ability for a foreigner to enter the US without authorization. In essence you don't seem to understand as to whom those rights are secured by and for whom. We secured those rights for ourselves and our posterity. Each has a minimum wage requirement, set by the state or the Fed Govt. The employer has legal means to find someone outside this society and bring them in if people here do not meet the qualifications for the job or if the employer can not find someone to fill the position. Nobody is entitled to any job, but if one wants to work and are qualified they have priority over someone from outside. The 14th Citizenship Clause says no such thing, it is nothing more than a Citizenship Clause, not a Birth Right Clause. The 14th is declaratory of existing law, that law being the 1866 Civil Rights Act. Not all children born to non-citizens are denied citizenship at birth, only those born to parents that have no legal domicil or legal residents in the US. Illegal immigrants have neither. There are no members of Congress that have been born to illegal immigrant parents. What could you possibly be right about? Even if the 14th is found to have never been properly ratified, citizenship laws are those found in the 1866 CRA, and laws prior.
I don't know what you're talking about. We were not talking about the 14th Amendment or birthright citizenship. The issue is, do you believe "unalienable rights" means that nations have no legal basis to control their borders and determine who can be in their country or not? I think the answer is pretty obvious that you do believe that, and since you do, it's impossible to have a reasoned discussion about it with you, since your answer is based on some sort of insane ideology that has nothing to do with "unalienable rights."
You've failed to answer simple questions. How come? America has a right and duty to protect its borders. We can even decide who does and does not get to be citizens. But, NONE of that has any bearing on the fact that individuals have unalienable Rights. The employer has an unalienable Right to hire the best candidate for the job - even when it's a foreigner. A landlord has an unalienable Right to rent to whomever they want. You and I have an unalienable Right to do business with the people, companies and vendors of our choice. NONE of that has squat to do with the protection of the border. The government can regulate who comes across the border; however, they have no de jure authority to prohibit those from coming here. Either you understand the principle that our forefathers were the immigrants and that they claimed unalienable Rights... the same Rights that protected their entry into the U.S. or you don't. When all the smoke clears and you've chosen between the lesser of two evils and predictably lost, let's hook up again and you can tell me how much you wished you'd listened to a voice of reason. The foreigners are coming and you won't stop them with walls, picked from air quotas, or other government enforced methods. Give the American people back their Liberty and allow them to decide for themselves who they want to hire, rent to, buy from, etc. Do that and the issue will become self regulating. Get rid of racial quotas, anti - "discriminatory" laws. Get rid of the laws that force people to become citizens in exchange for exercising God given Rights. The more you take government out of that equation, the faster the issue can be resolved.
We can even decide who enters and who does not. Nobody has the "right" unalienable or not, to enter into another country without that countries authorization. Using unalienable incorrectly. We the people have de jure authority to prohibit who we choose to enter. Our forefathers were no longer immigrants, many were born here. Even the "native Americans" immigrated here at some point, at what point does one not become an immigrant? The American people still have all their Liberty. There are no laws that force people to become citizens. Nobody has the "God given right" to enter another country without that countries authorization.
You're speaking of irrelevancies. When you use the term "unalienable rights" you are really meaning, based on your examples of rights to hire, rent, or do business with whomever you want, what you really mean is the freedom of association. News flash, but that was pretty much repealed during the civil rights era. Your rights to employ, rent, or do business with is regulated by the government. So again, your issue is really with Civil Rights, not immigration law.
I genuinely do not like the Civil Rights laws. That you are absolutely correct on. Let me try and simplify all of this for you: The Constitution is, essentially, a contract between We, the people and that entity called government. Originally, the Constitution was written "to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..." Ourselves and our posterity was ruled by the Supreme Court to mean the white race (see Dred Scott v. Sanford as an example of this.) The liberals of the day were so infuriated by the Dred Scott decision that they worked day and night to pass the 14th Amendment. It was done so by a less than honest process and many legal scholars have determined that the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified: http://www.sweetliberty.org/fourteenth.amend.htm#.Vj9V2V6zlec http://www.barefootsworld.net/14uncon.html http://www.truthsetsusfree.com/14thAmendment.pdf The basis / foundation of the Civil Rights laws is the 14th Amendment, which provides: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The 14th Amendment DID extend Liberty to foreigners and there is no exception for their failure to obey any immigration law. One of my early experiences with this application of this principle came by way of a position paper from the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office. Here is an excerpt: "The Okaloosa County Sheriffs Office is committed to the rule of law and upholding constitutional principles. Basic tenets of the US Constitution and previous rulings by the Supreme Court prevent us from conducting operations described in the reports. Contrary to popular belief, so-called Illegal Aliens have the same civil rights as any American. This is a matter of law and is beyond debate. As partial evidence of the civil rights protection for aliens, the 14th Amendment contains the following clause: No State shall . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Note use of the word person, not citizen. The rules that prevent us from rounding up unauthorized aliens are the same rules that protect you and every other American from unwarranted search and seizure, unlawful detentions, and the knock in the night on your front door. We cannot solve the problems of illegal immigration with simplistic, feel-good responses. The mere unauthorized presence in the U.S. is a civil, not a criminal, violation of U.S. law1. The removal of aliens not authorized to be in the U.S. is an administrative process, not a criminal process..." (This used to be on their website, but has been removed.) Civil Rights for foreigners are related to the 14th Amendment and the 14th Amendment extends liberty to all persons. So, yes, liberty is a Right enjoyed even by undocumented foreigners. Liberty is an unalienable Right. The Bill of Rights is a limitation on government. You're only trying to kill the messenger by telling me what I believe or disbelieve when I'm being square with you on how this is applied in the real world. I'm working with what I know to be the facts and staying within those parameters to get the best possible result.
Dred Scott simply ruled that a Black man was not a citizen since slaves were considered property. No, they passed the 1866 Civil Rights Act. These blog links are not legal scholars. The portion of the 14th you cite is directed at the individual state, not the individual themselves. The STATE can't deprive a person of liberty without due process, meaning unless the person is found guilty of a STATE crime, which is why it goes on to state without due process of law. Your failing to comprehend the very text that you claim to be a strict constructionist about, you seem more to be a textualist, one that changes the meaning based on what they want a specific word to mean. All you have done is demonstrate that you don't comprehend what they are stating. The 14th doesn't extend liberty to all persons. Your interpretations are imaginative to say the least, however they are not based on reality or facts.
As I suspected, it takes a bit of digging, but eventually you get to the bottom of it. I've found that to be true of immigration discussions on this forum like no other topic. Your first volley is to hide your real position, so it takes several posts to dig deep to find out what your real issue is. So let's dig deeper shall we? Your post of the memo or whatever it is from the Okaloosa County Sheriffs Office is being as deceptive as you are. Everything that illegals do to stay in this country rests on felonies, specifically identity fraud. To get a job, fake social security card. For driver's license, fake birth certificate, leading to a fake ID. All of those are felonies. It has nothing to do with barging into homes in the middle of the night.
My real position has never been hidden. Every time we don't do a complete thesis on this subject in every post, the Secure the border crowd slings that accusation. I'm neither on the left nor the right of this topic. Dig as deep as you like. I make no apologies for the fact that was among the first people to ever sign the Freeman's Pledge. My card number is 0037. You've heard of card carrying communists; today you've met a card carrying Freeman. http://www.militianews.com/freemans-oath-freemans-pledge/ Identity fraud is a separate issue from people coming here to exercise constitutional rights. OTOH, let me play the devil's advocate for a moment. If Uncle Scam tells YOU that you must surrender your personally held weapons, will YOU violate the law and keep them instead? Are you telling me that you would not violate the law in order to protect your God given unalienable Rights? If YOUR children were hungry, would you worry about a freaking piece of paper keeping you from feeding your children? Really? There is a bigger issue here than a civil violation of the law that is worth a whopping $250 fine. If the foreigner is not justified in working around the law in order to go to work, then YOU too will have to forfeit the Right of RESISTANCE to tyranny. You don't want to address the 75 percent of unauthorized foreigners that are working in the U.S. under their own names and with Taxpayer Identification Numbers provided by YOUR government. And no sir. It's time YOU quit playing that game. Just because I stand up and tell you the truth is NOT evidence that I am in any way connected to the left. People that make that allegation are afraid of the truth. I've not accused you of anything except not knowing all sides of the issue. Hopefully you will show us you are more mature than you just acted and man up to the table, discussing the other issues that are interwoven to the overall concerns.
Both are nut jobs. http://www.militianews.com/freemans-oath-freemans-pledge/ People don't get to come here to exercise their constitutional rights. Those here have Constitutional Protections. All rights are limiting by there very nature, hell you want to keep criminals from owning weapons and those that are mentally unstable, what about their unalienable right to keep and bear arms? Seems you only want what/when convenient for you. No illegal immigrants children are hungry in their home nations. It is a Federal Misdemeanor that can also spend up to 6 months in jail and up to 2 years in jail if a second offense which is a Federal Felony. A foreigner doesn't have a right to work in the US unless they are granted that privilege. Under their own names? If they are supplying the employer with a TIN, then IRS will send a no-match letter to the employer and the employee will have to correct, if unable to correct, the employee (illegal immigrant) usually just quits showing up and looks elsewhere for work, until he/she is caught again. So now your imaginative opinion is all of a sudden the truth? Everything you claim is either an out right lie or imaginative interpretation. You seem to be intellectually handicapped, your imaginative opinion is not truth, nor fact, nor reality.
