Anchors Aweigh on Anchor Babies
|
|
|||||
|
5 votes
|
|
26% | |||
|
14 votes
|
|
74% | |||
Republicans are moving forward to eliminate one of the most contentious and obvious abuses of the U.S. Constitution: birthright citizenship.
This measure was put forward in the 14th Amendment as means of ensuring
that former slaves and their children would be American citizens.
However, now we see how that Amendment is being twisted as the children
of illegal aliens are instantly granted citizenship even though their
parents are not Americans and have no intention to be. Something has to
give.
As reported by Fox News,
“Four Republican lawmakers introduced legislation Thursday that would
end automatic granting of American citizenship to children born in the
United States to illegal immigrants, arguing “birthright citizenship” is
an incentive for illegals to race for the U.S. border.”
Reps. Steve King of Iowa, George Miller of California and Rob Woodall and Phil Gingrey,
both of Georgia, said the current practice of extending U.S.
citizenship to so-called “anchor babies” is a “misapplication” of the Constitution’s 14th Amendment.
“Passage of this bill will ensure that immigration law breakers are not rewarded, will close the door to future waves of extended family chain migration, and will help to bring an end to the global ‘birth tourism’ industry,” King said.
The move by the legislators is not a constitutional amendment. As noted in the report, “the House legislation would amend Section 301
of the Immigration and Nationality Act to clarify those classes of
individuals born in the United States who are nationals and citizens of
the United States at birth.”
Of
course, liberals are up in arms and are blasting what they call
“extremist” legislation. Extremist? Two illegal aliens cross the border
to work. They go back to Mexico when work isn’t here. Back and forth.
Then, they have a child while in America, and all of a sudden, that
child is an American citizen? Come on!
One
argument is that you don’t “punish the children” for the sins of the
parents. That phrase was even used in the Fox News story in a lead-in to
a quote by Janet Murguia, president and CEO of the National Council of
La Raza, who said, “These thoughtless and unnecessary proposals take our
country in the wrong direction, away from inclusion and our other core
American values.” First of all, declaring that the child is a citizen of
Mexico (or whatever country) is NOT a punishment. It’s simply stating a
fact. Secondly, you certainly don’t reward the children for sins of the
parents either.
In a statement released by the bill’s sponsors, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) said that the current situation “creates an incentive for illegal aliens to cross our border.” Rep. Gary Miller
(R-CA) summed up the bill this way: “It is unfair to grant birthright
citizenship to children of illegal immigrants because it undermines the
intention of the Fourteenth Amendment, rewards those that have recklessly broken our nation’s immigration laws,
and costs American taxpayers billions annually. By simply closing this
loophole, we will save taxpayers billions and reduce the appeal of
entering the United States illegally. This bill simply makes sense.”
For interesting reading and the liberal perspective, check out this column by CNN
contributor and NPR commentator Ruben Navarrette, Jr. As usual, this
liberal’s take on the situation boils down to two facets: 1) Republicans
are racists, and/or 2) Republicans are only thinking about politics.
Seriously? Can’t we have a discussion about ANY issue without the same
old, tired tactics?
In
his “8 reasons to leave 14th Amendment alone,” guess what Navarrette
states in reason 1? That’s right… “In this country, we don’t visit the
sins of the parent onto the child.” Most of his other reasons deal with
politics or racism. In reason 3, he does mocks the conservative
principle of strict adherence to the Constitution by claiming
Republicans want to simply disregard the 14th Amendment.
That’s not the case at all. It is clear and obvious to anyone with a
brain that the 14th Amendment (which was written to cover the
circumstances of freed slaves) is being abused. Again, does it make any
sense at all to grant American citizenship to a child of two people who
are not citizens and have no plans to be? No.
States are also joining in the effort to address the anchor baby situation:
Illegal immigration is a huge problem for the United States. It costs
taxpayers billions of dollars, costs jobs, and leads to violence along
the border.
It all comes down to doing what is right as a country. America is the
most welcoming country in the world, and we do this through a series of
laws. If the laws are being abused, then they need to be changed.
Top Opinion
-
Or illegal(s)?

















We have had an "invasion" for years by twisting the "original" intent of the 14th Amendment. It is time it stops. And, I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR how expensive it is. It is less expensive than giving these criminals Medicare, Disability, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Free College (Pell Grants) and Federal Loans (that we end up paying for in the long run if they don't repay the loan.
Illegals are not citizens and should not be allowed free access to federal and state aid or programs. Neither should the kids that are manufactured here just to become citizens.
I'm all for making our environment as hostile as possible for the illegals.
Bravo for the Reps for having the balls to do this.
About the moral dilemma, the child being born did not have choice of where to live. Their irresponsible law breaking parents made the choice for them, and a terrible one with setting precedent that it's ok to trespass and break laws. The consequences should be immediate deportation to the land where they come from, so the child could grow and develop in an environment their parents was exposed to.
Of course we could make them real anchor Brats and it only needs 2-3 feet of rope and 10-15 lb weight. tie rope to baby & weight and toss 'em overboard.
If WE broke a law? We'd be in prison. That is a fact!