Birthright citizenship, yay or nay?

2012-10-02 13:16:07

#1

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5824

Birthright citizenship in the United States refers to a person's acquisition of United States citizenship by virtue of the circumstances of his or her birth. It contrasts with citizenship acquired in other ways, for example by naturalization later in life. Birthright citizenship may be conferred by jus soli or jus sanguinis. Under United States law, any person born within the United States (including the territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands)[1] and subject to its jurisdiction is automatically granted U.S. citizenship,[2] as are many (though not all) children born to American citizens overseas.

I really like jus soli. I like the idea of anyone being "an American" by just being born here and taking part in society. The idea of a recently arrived engineer from India meeting a nice Indian lady who is also a fairly recent immigrant and having a child that is both legally and socially an American just warms my heart. Welcome to America. Glad to have you on board.

I don't like systems like the ones in a lot of places in Europe where you are what your parents are. Doesn't seem very welcoming or fair. Welcome to Norway! Here take a dangerous job on one of our fine oil rigs and help contribute to our massive welfare society. Any kids you may have with another nonNorwegian has to go to back to where you came from once we no longer need you though. Fuck them if this is the only place they know.

It wouldn't surprise me if jus sanguinis actually makes it less likely for immigrants and their children to assimilate into your countries.

I can see how it would be very difficult to have a system like ours since Europe is so small and dense but if South American managed to pull it off I'm sure you guys can too.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Jus_soli_world.png

Anyway, some people don't like our system because

"Anchor baby" is a pejorative term for a child born in the United States to immigrant parents, who, as an American citizen, supposedly can later facilitate immigration for relatives.

But it is not a problem really since economist have pretty much proven that illegal immigration on a whole is a good thing for our economy. They are also keeping our birthrates up.

2012-10-02 16:11:11

#2

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6955

I know people who's parents flew over to the states and had them there. Now they have to pay taxes to the IRS no matter where they work MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2012-10-02 16:15:06

#3

Mutantbear: Semi Constructive Criticism; +1,431|6204|London, England

i like the concept

it might not work too well in other countries

Last edited by Mutantbear (2012-10-02 16:15:45)

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

2012-10-02 16:22:21

#4

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6955

Here in the great land of Auz, if kids lived over five years before their 10th birthday, they get instant PR regardless of immigration status. It's to protect the kids from being deported in a country they grew up in and won't have to be punished for the crimes of their parents.

Last edited by Cybargs (2012-10-02 16:22:39)

2012-10-02 16:32:35

#5

Uzique The Lesser: Banned; +382|4493

not really sure if you're trolling or not about 'europe's citizenship system'. deporting newborn babies? uuum. i know you're not the biggest intellectual heavyweight here macbeth, but are you really trying to open a two-sided 'debate' with that sort of OP rhetoric? this thread is going to engender only one type of (intended) response, and that's about it. congrats on another nuanced, mind-opening intellectual experience.

2012-10-02 16:39:30

#6

Mutantbear: Semi Constructive Criticism; +1,431|6204|London, England

aynrandroolz wrote:
not really sure if you're trolling or not about 'europe's citizenship system'. deporting newborn babies? uuum. i know you're not the biggest intellectual heavyweight here macbeth, but are you really trying to open a two-sided 'debate' with that sort of OP rhetoric? this thread is going to engender only one type of (intended) response, and that's about it. congrats on another nuanced, mind-opening intellectual experience.

this thread taught me that europe tosses out newborn babies like they were trash

land of the free my ass

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

2012-10-02 22:44:54

#7

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6955

aynrandroolz wrote:
not really sure if you're trolling or not about 'europe's citizenship system'. deporting newborn babies?

Yeah haven't you heard it all over the news, crazy EU tossing out muslim kids and shit

2012-10-03 00:55:17

#8

globefish23: sophisticated slacker; +334|6563|Graz, Austria

Unfortunately, stuff like that happened several times in the past years, where families from the Kosovo where deported, although they had been living in Austria for more than 5 years already, with their kids having barely lived anywhere else.
They had jobs, went to school or had finished education.

The whole villages where they lived protested against it and one priest even hid one of the girls from the immigration authorities.

The stupid thing is that people coming to Austria seeking asylum have to wait many years until they get a - positive or negative - response.
Only recently some laws where changed that those people are allowed to work. Before that, they had to live in asylum quarters, getting fed by the state and church.

For the USA it's quite easy to do something like that, since they only have two landlocked borders.
The one to Mexico is more like the iron curtain, and no one wants to come down from Canada anyway.
Every other immigration is via airports and seaports, where you can hold immigrants in international territory.
No idea how that affects the amount of "anchor babies" though.

2012-10-03 01:37:07

#9

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,815|6345|eXtreme to the maX

Nay - system works fine in most countries, immigrants bucking the system by having kids shouldn't be allowed. Refugees etc are a different case, but not tourists, temporary workers, illegals etc.

Why should temporary workers on a 1-2 year contract, typically not paying full local taxes, have the right to have their kid taken care of for life by the host country? Nope.

Europe is too densely populated, and movement too easy for it to work - should someone be able to take a 30 min drive and then whichever country they're in has to take care of their kids until they're 18?

Socialism works well, but not if just anyone can walk in and take advantage of it.

Fuck Israel

2012-10-03 05:29:35

#10

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6955

Dilbert_X wrote:
Why should temporary workers on a 1-2 year contract, typically not paying full local taxes, have the right to have their kid taken care of for life by the host country? Nope.

Because their kids ending up as citizens would give them more incentives to stay? I know lots of people who's parents gave birth to them in the US so they can acquire citizenship and move there when they get older.

Lol Europe too densely populated my ass.

2012-10-03 05:32:01

#11

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|6910|UK

Western Europe yes.

Eastern Europe nope.

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2012-10-03 05:33:45

#12

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6955

m3thod wrote:
Western Europe yes.

Eastern Europe nope.

It's all relative. When about half of the world lives in Asia... Europe isn't that "densely populated"

It's funny when dilbert goes on about an immigration rant when he's a 10 pound pom.

2012-10-03 08:34:39

#13

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6920|Disaster Free Zone

Cybargs wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Why should temporary workers on a 1-2 year contract, typically not paying full local taxes, have the right to have their kid taken care of for life by the host country? Nope.
Because their kids ending up as citizens would give them more incentives to stay? I know lots of people who's parents gave birth to them in the US so they can acquire citizenship and move there when they get older.

Lol Europe too densely populated my ass.

Why do you want them to stay?

2012-10-03 08:49:44

#14

Uzique The Lesser: Banned; +382|4493

Cybargs wrote:
aynrandroolz wrote:
not really sure if you're trolling or not about 'europe's citizenship system'. deporting newborn babies?
Yeah haven't you heard it all over the news, crazy EU tossing out muslim kids and shit

um no i haven't heard that in the sensationalist media, quelle surprise.

the thread op talks about indian immigrants and kids settling down in america, "welcome to a new life", etc.

have you looked at the racial make-up of most western european states, post-1920? i can guarantee you that more indians, pakistanias, asians, eastern europeans, africans, west indians, jews, etc. have settled in european states than in america (with an exception for the particular case of post-ww2 european jewry vs. american diaspora... which for obvious reasons, etc-ra). you act as if we are intolerant and kick out anyone that "isn't born here by blood". rofl. the scandinavian states you rely on for examples are extremely specious. they are unique in europe, being 2/3 small and insular states in the fuck-knows-nowhere north who are still 'managing' their country in quite a socialistic and experimental fashion-- to great success for them, i may add (they rate the highest quality of living in the developed world-- and they still each have sizeable immigrant populations to speak of). the rest of europe is nothing like them when it comes to citizenship. it is quite easy to become 'british'. in fact it's a pride of british identity that we are so open and all-encompassing. we are miles ahead of the states when it comes to a 'multi-cultural' society. all this talk of europe being one big locked border if you're from outside is complete and utter fucking nonsense. not to mention that europe has continually expanded in the last few years to take on more and more piss-poor states, granting all citizens eu membership, rights, and access to continental labour. remind me when the usa absorbs half of the shittiest economies in southern america and grants all of their citizens' access to hop over the border and get jobs. you guys have enough problem with mexicans doing that alone.

oh and as for the grand american vision, global citizens, etc.... you are pretty much the world's sole backer of israel. the closest thing we have to an apartheid ghetto-ized state in the world in the 21st century. well done. recognising citizenship is such a noble high-ideal for you! no. america has its current citizenship policy because it's of benefit to you in some capitalistic way. nothing more, nothing less (i.e. it incentivizes skilled foreign workers and families to join the economy, aka a 'brain drain' effect). don't be so fucking naive. plus it's not as if your citizenship guarantees basic things, such as a decent public education, or free healthcare. duh.

this thread is terminally fucking stupid.

Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-10-03 09:32:22)

2012-10-03 09:31:08

#15

Jenspm: penis; +1,716|6971|St. Andrews / Oslo

Macbeth wrote:
I don't like systems like the ones in a lot of places in Europe where you are what your parents are. Doesn't seem very welcoming or fair. Welcome to Norway! Here take a dangerous job on one of our fine oil rigs and help contribute to our massive welfare society. Any kids you may have with another nonNorwegian has to go to back to where you came from once we no longer need you though. Fuck them if this is the only place they know.

The Norwegian government isn't allowed by Norwegian law to deport anyone who's born in Norway and lived there all their life.

cool stories, though.

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/26774/flickricon.png

2012-10-03 09:36:02

#16

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

aynrandroolz wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
aynrandroolz wrote:
not really sure if you're trolling or not about 'europe's citizenship system'. deporting newborn babies?
Yeah haven't you heard it all over the news, crazy EU tossing out muslim kids and shit
um no i haven't heard that in the sensationalist media, quelle surprise.

the thread op talks about indian immigrants and kids settling down in america, "welcome to a new life", etc.

have you looked at the racial make-up of most western european states, post-1920? i can guarantee you that more indians, pakistanias, asians, eastern europeans, africans, west indians, jews, etc. have settled in european states than in america (with an exception for the particular case of post-ww2 european jewry vs. american diaspora... which for obvious reasons, etc-ra). you act as if we are intolerant and kick out anyone that "isn't born here by blood". rofl. the scandinavian states you rely on for examples are extremely specious. they are unique in europe, being 2/3 small and insular states in the fuck-knows-nowhere north who are still 'managing' their country in quite a socialistic and experimental fashion-- to great success for them, i may add (they rate the highest quality of living in the developed world-- and they still each have sizeable immigrant populations to speak of). the rest of europe is nothing like them when it comes to citizenship. it is quite easy to become 'british'. in fact it's a pride of british identity that we are so open and all-encompassing. we are miles ahead of the states when it comes to a 'multi-cultural' society. all this talk of europe being one big locked border if you're from outside is complete and utter fucking nonsense. not to mention that europe has continually expanded in the last few years to take on more and more piss-poor states, granting all citizens eu membership, rights, and access to continental labour. remind me when the usa absorbs half of the shittiest economies in southern america and grants all of their citizens' access to hop over the border and get jobs. you guys have enough problem with mexicans doing that alone.

oh and as for the grand american vision, global citizens, etc.... you are pretty much the world's sole backer of israel. the closest thing we have to an apartheid ghetto-ized state in the world in the 21st century. well done. recognising citizenship is such a noble high-ideal for you! no. america has its current citizenship policy because it's of benefit to you in some capitalistic way. nothing more, nothing less (i.e. it incentivizes skilled foreign workers and families to join the economy, aka a 'brain drain' effect). don't be so fucking naive. plus it's not as if your citizenship guarantees basic things, such as a decent public education, or free healthcare. duh.

this thread is terminally fucking stupid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … ation_rate

3.62 US to 2.59 UK per 1,000 population. Fairly close. Italy, Spain and Luxembourg are the only European nations that have a higher migration rate than we do.

Please stop posting about stuff you don't know anything about. Thanks.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-10-03 09:42:23

#17

Uzique The Lesser: Banned; +382|4493

Jay wrote:
aynrandroolz wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
Yeah haven't you heard it all over the news, crazy EU tossing out muslim kids and shit
um no i haven't heard that in the sensationalist media, quelle surprise.

the thread op talks about indian immigrants and kids settling down in america, "welcome to a new life", etc.

have you looked at the racial make-up of most western european states, post-1920? i can guarantee you that more indians, pakistanias, asians, eastern europeans, africans, west indians, jews, etc. have settled in european states than in america (with an exception for the particular case of post-ww2 european jewry vs. american diaspora... which for obvious reasons, etc-ra). you act as if we are intolerant and kick out anyone that "isn't born here by blood". rofl. the scandinavian states you rely on for examples are extremely specious. they are unique in europe, being 2/3 small and insular states in the fuck-knows-nowhere north who are still 'managing' their country in quite a socialistic and experimental fashion-- to great success for them, i may add (they rate the highest quality of living in the developed world-- and they still each have sizeable immigrant populations to speak of). the rest of europe is nothing like them when it comes to citizenship. it is quite easy to become 'british'. in fact it's a pride of british identity that we are so open and all-encompassing. we are miles ahead of the states when it comes to a 'multi-cultural' society. all this talk of europe being one big locked border if you're from outside is complete and utter fucking nonsense. not to mention that europe has continually expanded in the last few years to take on more and more piss-poor states, granting all citizens eu membership, rights, and access to continental labour. remind me when the usa absorbs half of the shittiest economies in southern america and grants all of their citizens' access to hop over the border and get jobs. you guys have enough problem with mexicans doing that alone.

oh and as for the grand american vision, global citizens, etc.... you are pretty much the world's sole backer of israel. the closest thing we have to an apartheid ghetto-ized state in the world in the 21st century. well done. recognising citizenship is such a noble high-ideal for you! no. america has its current citizenship policy because it's of benefit to you in some capitalistic way. nothing more, nothing less (i.e. it incentivizes skilled foreign workers and families to join the economy, aka a 'brain drain' effect). don't be so fucking naive. plus it's not as if your citizenship guarantees basic things, such as a decent public education, or free healthcare. duh.

this thread is terminally fucking stupid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … ation_rate

3.62 US to 2.59 UK per 1,000 population. Fairly close. Italy, Spain and Luxembourg are the only European nations that have a higher migration rate than we do.

Please stop posting about stuff you don't know anything about. Thanks.

what does that have to do with multiculturalism? also how does that sort of statistic take into account the second/third-generation citizens that come from migrant families in recent history? the majority of the population influx into western european countries occurred around the time of mid-century rapid decolonization.

i am really failing to see what places america as a beacon of light in the citizenship stakes over european countries. we are extremely tolerant and all-encompassing. the overblown rhetoric in the OP that america is a 'land for everyone', whereas the EU 'throws out muslim babies'... is patently false and absolutely ridiculous.

also "stop talking about stuff you don't know anything about" is really fuckin' funny, coming from you. the dude that pontificates on subjects he knows nothing about all the time. congrats, you found a wikipedia statistic (which probably isn't even relevant). i guess now you 'know stuff'.

Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-10-03 09:42:49)

2012-10-03 09:45:23

#18

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

I have Macbeth blocked so I didn't read the OP (nor do I want to, so don't quote it ). I just don't think you should comment on multiculturalism or immigration in America when you have displayed such a silly understanding of our country on so many occasions

"My country is more multicultural than yours" ok, a) based on what metric and b) who gives a flying fuck?.

Last edited by Jay (2012-10-03 09:49:24)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-10-03 11:01:57

#19

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6920|Disaster Free Zone

Really Jay?

You thought it was unique to New York to be able get Vietnamese food from a restaurant run by Vietnamese.

2012-10-03 11:04:28

#20

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

DrunkFace wrote:
Really Jay?

You thought it was unique to New York to be able get Vietnamese food from a restaurant run by Vietnamese.

No. But it is unique to have all the restaurants i listed in that post available in two blocks on one street.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-10-03 11:07:39

#21

Uzique The Lesser: Banned; +382|4493

Jay wrote:
DrunkFace wrote:
Really Jay?

You thought it was unique to New York to be able get Vietnamese food from a restaurant run by Vietnamese.
No. But it is unique to have all the restaurants i listed in that post available in two blocks on one street.

no it's not. walk down brick lane in london on any day of the week and you'll see just as many languages, cuisines, and natives.

you say "stop talking about things you know nothing about". really? fucking really? i didn't realise you had peregrinated around all of australia's and europe's major metropolitan areas. funny that. you're pretty overweight for a dude that has done so much walking and seeing.

it just shows how delusional you truly are if you think having a large number of restaurants available in a small area is 'unique' to new york. you could get that shit in toronto, the closest foreign major city to you.

Last edited by aynrandroolz (2012-10-03 11:08:52)

2012-10-03 11:09:11

#22

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6739|so randum

it isn't ):

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2012-10-03 11:16:33

#23

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

aynrandroolz wrote:
Jay wrote:
DrunkFace wrote:
Really Jay?

You thought it was unique to New York to be able get Vietnamese food from a restaurant run by Vietnamese.
No. But it is unique to have all the restaurants i listed in that post available in two blocks on one street.
no it's not. walk down brick lane in london on any day of the week and you'll see just as many languages, cuisines, and natives.

you say "stop talking about things you know nothing about". really? fucking really? i didn't realise you had peregrinated around all of australia's and europe's major metropolitan areas. funny that. you're pretty overweight for a dude that has done so much walking and seeing.

it just shows how delusional you truly are if you think having a large number of restaurants available in a small area is 'unique' to new york. you could get that shit in toronto, the closest foreign major city to you.

That's nice. You know what I think of when I think of your country? It's surely not the multiculturalism bullshit you keep going on abut in order to make yourself feel superior about something, its the fat ugly chavs that populate your country being ruled by effete arrogant pricks. It's the fact that a country that produced Newton, and Locke and Mill now produces Sophie Reade's and Lacy Banghard's. That's your current cultural contribution to the world: big titted women. Congratulations. Once an empire, you're now a backwater country with a 1000% debt to gdp ratio. But god save the queen and the nhs and all that. Who gives a fig about multiculturalism, you have a million other more pressing matters to concern yourselves with.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-10-03 11:20:11

#24

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5597|London, England

No, I'm not mad at all. I just think you pick the most inane shit to be proud of. 'My country is more culturally diverse.' Cool.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-10-03 11:35:53

#25

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5824

This is a new page. Maybe on this page we can discuss citizenship and immigrantion. I do realize it was partially my fault for making a bad OP.

BF2S Forums Birthright citizenship, yay or nay?

aynrandroolz wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

m3thod wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

Jay wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Jay wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

aynrandroolz wrote:

Jay wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

Board footer