Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 5:04 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
I can't think of one good reason that someone becomes a U.S. citizen based solely upon the fact that they were born on U.S. soil. Can you? I'm interested to read what you think.
|
Scenario 1: A couple from Guatemala come up. The guy gets a job in a meat packing plant and the woman gets a job as a maid at the Motel 7. They have a kid. I'd say the kid deserves automatic citizenship because the parents are contributing to society.
a) I'd feel better if the parents had made some kind of commitment to long term residency, but as things are now, they can't do it. This needs to be cleaned up. Obviously there are millions of jobs for immigrants. Get that regularized.
b) The second reason the kid deserves citizenship is because the rights he is guaranteed (education, food etc.) are basic human rights.
Scenario 2: A pregnant Korean woman flies in to LA, stays in a motel or with a cousin for a couple of months, has the baby then both fly back to Seoul.
I'd say this kid does not deserve citizenship. The mother has made no contribution to society. Her stay was temporary in the extreme. The only purpose was to obtain citizenship for the kid.
Scenario 3: A Korean chemical researcher and his family go to Indiana University for a year. During the year a kid is born then everyone flies back to Seoul.
This one is sticky. The father is contributing, but the stay is temporary. I could be convinced either way, but my gut tells me the kid should not receive citizenship.
I'm sure there are other likely scenarios. My problem about a Constitutional amendment would be how to write one that covers all likely scenarios in a couple of sentences. I would not be in favor of a 45 page amendment covering only citizenship. It's just not the place for it. |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
