Posted on 07/11/2007 7:55:07 PM PDT by TavoNYC
Some time back in my researches, I found that for someone to have citizenship, or their babies, he/she must owe allegiance to the country, for example permanent residents of a territory. Illegals continue to owe allegiance to their own country even when they are here; they never renoune it, nor affirm allegiance to the USA. Therefore like the children of ambassadors the children of illegals are not citizens. But since no one bothers to do any research our politicians and bureaucrats in ignorance treat the illegals children as citizens so they become de facto citizens.
And is that suppose to make this woman’s behavior OK?
The parents obtain many rights not to be deported. Are these rights written into law? No
But all the time parents are not deported because of anchor babies.
These illegal aliens have de facto rights not to be deported when they have their anchor baby or babies. Once more, this is not law but this is what takes place in the real world
Do a few unlucky ones get deported despite anchor babies? Yes! But this is rare
Why don't you talk to some of the poor Mexicans in NYC and tell them your anchor baby theory?
There is a difference between friends/family communicating in another language and snobbery. It really irritates me to enter an area where English is being spoken and people start to speak in a different. IMO, in public the language of choice should be what the majority speaks, if possible.
No benefits should be sent to illegals for their baby.
I would think lots of fraud is going on.
Sorry.
You want to see rude go to Chinatown and be anything but Chinese.
Even my Filipino freind gets the cold shoulder when trying to shop there.
Sorry for the rudeness....but people have had it. We are (in my community) being over run. And, the anchor babies are a real thing. People are sick of Welfare paying for it.
I think you are confusing rethorical points used in the debate with actual legal arguments made before the immigration authorities or the courts.
It’s true that hardship and family unity are often cited as arguments by the defendant in deportation cases, but this hardly guarantees they won’t be deported as has been established by several well publicized cases.
Sorry I misread you.
Regarding the seemingly-patronizing “well-spoken and legal” comment through... hell, from my point of view that’s a compliment nowadays. I’ve got women in my company from China and Mexico and none of them can speak english worth a damn.
I can at least semi-communicate with the Mexicans. As for Chinese I know “ni hao” (hiya) and “zai jian” (cya).
The reason the amount of money I’ve paid in taxes is relevant is that this woman’s comment implies that i) I’m here illegally, and ii) I’m out to live off the generosity of American tax payers. Neither of which is true.
Thanks for your message.
:)
Thanks for your message. I suspect you are right.
>I’m just simply making my comment from the mainstream and well established common law view that a child born in these circumstances is indeed a US citizen.<
Does Mexico grant the same citizenship courtesy to ‘foreign visitors’? No, they don’t and I believe that they are correct in not doing so.
I value American citizenship very highly and I don’t think it should be granted to any pregnant woman who slips actoss the border to give birth.
5. I think I said it before, but since you ask: I AM a LEGAL immigrant. You also ask me why as a legal immigrant I defend “those who jump ahead of the line”. My reasons:
a) Sentimental reasons/familiarity. The fact that so many illegal immigrants are Mexicans probably gets to a soft spot in my heart. The fact is that I like these people, and although I certainly don’t know many illegal immigrants, at least not intimately, when I see one of these guys in a restaurant of behind a counter, I can’t help but think that these hard working people are the salt of the earth. By the way, I feel the same way about most Americans, and actually most people I meet. And I’m sure I’m probably right most of the time. I think I ultimately believe most people are decent.
b) I don’t perceive their being here as “jumping ahead of the line”. To be honest, the legal immigration system seems to be pretty disfunctional at this point. Waiting times for immigrant visas are so long for most family and even employment categories that they are almost meaningless. For example, in my case, had I not qualified for an “alien of extraordinary ability” classification, my greencard would have effectively taken many, many years (perhaps even a decade or more). I think if there were actually a realistic legal immigration program people would not be trying to jump ahead of the line.
A previous post by TavoNYC-sorry but I disagree,they are jumping in line
Well, you don't get to ignore the child's rights. Your statement was that an anchor baby was not a logical term as the parents get no benefits from having a baby as a US citizen. That is false. Period. The parents can collect SSI and other benefits in the name of the child, as the child can claim them as a citizen (and many illegals and legals do). So the parents DO gain a benefit (because the baby sure isn't the one spending the food stamps, money, etc.). Your assertion is demonstrably false. Sorry, but you don't get to pick the context of this debate, especially when you ignore pertinent evidence...
It’s true that hardship and family unity are often cited as arguments by the defendant in deportation cases, but this hardly guarantees they won’t be deported as has been established by several well publicized cases.
You are the confused one
We have tons of laws to evict illegal aliens but as a practical matter (virtually) no one is deported. This is why we have 20 million illegals aliens
Talk to some poor Mexicans in the NYC area. They will laugh at what you say about anchor babies. As far as anchor babies these pobrecitos are much much smarter than you. So you do your investment banking (what you are good at) and they'll do their anchor babies (what they are good at)
Yes you are.
Your argument is with your compatriots that have abused this country and created the attitude that caused someone to (mistakenly) wail on you.
Just as people get suspicious of young Muslims when they see them, the problem is not with those that hold the opinions, it is with those that shaped them.
Ten years ago, no-one here referred to young Mexicans as "anchor babies, or feared young Muslims, what do you think happened to change that attitude?
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.