Posted on 01/15/2012 10:31:26 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
A bill has been introduced in the United States Senate which will authorize the federal government to revoke the citizenship, creating practical expatriates, of American citizens.
Introduced by Connecticut Independent Joe Lieberman and Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown, S 1698, the “Enemy Expatriation Act,” is a simple, 2 page document which offers apparently innocent amendments and additions to existing federal legislation. (1)
That legislation, known as Title 8, “…outlines the role of aliens and nationality in the U.S. Code.” And it is just one small piece of this massive and complex law which the Enemy Expatriation Act seeks to modify, that being Section 349, the means by which “a person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality…,” that is, his citizenship. (2)
Though there is currently little contained in Section 349 which would alarm any American citizen, one phrase added to the legislation by the “Enemy Expatriation Act” would change everything.
For it states that anyone voluntarily “engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States” will lose his “nationality.” And nationality means citizenship! (1)
To be sure, most of us would be in favor of revoking American citizenship if it has been improperly, perhaps surreptitiously attained by Muslim terrorists who have entered the United States only to commit acts of violence and murder.
But it’s necessary to remember who we are dealing with in Washington, DC.
To Janet Napolitano and her Department of Homeland Security, it is Libertarians, soldiers returning from combat, gun owners, militia members, devout believers in the Constitution and those who loudly mistrust and criticize the federal government who are the true threats of “engaging in hostilities against the United States.”
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Cheers!
A child born to parents legally in the US and abiding by our laws is exempt from US citizenship. A child born to parents that have violated and have contempt our laws is a US citizen and you don't see any problem with that?
To quote Popeye, "I yam what I yam."
What’s the law that was broken?
The law that was broken, is the law that they broke by entering America illegally.
The child has done nothing. The citizenship - belongs to the child, not to the family.
The problem isn’t birthright citizenship, it is welfare and all the other goodies that are disbursed to citizens just for breathing. Get rid of those, and we return to how the republic used to work.
The Republic was built off immigrants that were willing to come and contribute to America. This is why the current welfare policy is a hindrance, because it attracts the wrong kind of immigrants.
Take away the goodies, and you get rid of most of the impetus for folks to come to the US.
If you answer my question then I’ll answer yours.
Less than ten percent of Americans are immigrants. 90 percent were born here. We are not a nation of immigrants. Stop buying into the liberal propaganda.
Exempt - by choice. I don’t have a problem with foreign dignitaries declining to take advantage of their entitlement to American citizenship. They could take it up if they wanted to.
And no, I don’t have a problem with granting citizenship to a child born in america to those who entered the country illegally. The child is not responsible for the actions of his parents.
The real problem, and this is the problem I have - are the entitlements.
Well lets see.
John Washington was from Essex, emigrating in 1656 to start tobacco plantations in Virginia.
William Randolph, emigrated from Warwickshire in 1669.
John Adams Sr, Emigrated from Essex in 1638.
Shall I continue?
Yes, immigrants did found America. I’m not sure why this is controversial. Every single one of these folks took risks to come from the old country to start a life in the new country. By taking these risks, their children and their children’s children eventually became the folks that signed the declaration of independence and the founders of the country.
If these folks did not take the chance, then America as she became would not have became what she did.
According to you illegal aliens should get citizenship while legal aliens should not. So much for the rule of law huh?
Screw the rule of law, we don’t need no stinkin’ rule of law..isn’t that right?
How is a child born in america an illegal alien? What border did he cross?
I answered your question, now answer mine. What law was broken?
And you are pleased to conflate the Founders of this nation with the illegals who today pour across the border on a daily basis?
If you don’t know or refuse to understand the difference between illegal immigrants and colonists, there can be no rational discourse with you.
They were immigrants - and that’s the point I’m trying to drive home.
He says the nation was not built by immigrants, when the fact is, yes it was, very much so.
So you concede the point that the founders were the descendents of immigrants? That is the point I was trying to drive home.
And again, how is a child born in America an illegal? What border did the child cross?
We do not hold a child responsible for what laws their parents broke.
Oddly you refuse to answer the question. Why is this?
Is it because answering that question is fatal to your case?
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=4976
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.