President Trump Wants an end to Birthright Citizenship for Illegals - Page 3 - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-25-2019, 11:42 AM
Harmless Drudge's Avatar
Harmless Drudge Harmless Drudge is online now
Weed 'em and reap
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: A once-free nation
Age: 41
Posts: 29,109
Thanks: 232,010
Thanked 120,913 Times in 23,958 Posts
Default



Advertise Here

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodwrench708 View Post
Be careful for what you ask for

By declaring the original intent of the 14th Amendment is obsolete could cause the same issue with the 2nd Amendment

Opening up a new issue...could backfire on you
Jus soli was never the original intent of the 14th Amendment. It came to be administrative posture through a phenomenon called textual misconstruction, the intentional misuse of the text of the law to create concepts out of whole cloth in direct contradiction of the letter and spirit of the law.

The 14th Amendment only applies to people subject to out law-of-nations jurisdiction. It does not apply to members of other nations. All of the exclusions listed are so listed because they refer to members of other nations. The citizenship does not apply to aliens.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Harmless Drudge For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 12:30 PM
9111315's Avatar
9111315 9111315 is offline
Inglorious Deplorable
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: central America
Posts: 21,136
Thanks: 36,785
Thanked 33,686 Times in 13,349 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeDefense View Post
snip ...

It doesn't grant blanket citizenship to everyone born here. Children of diplomats have always been exempted because they are not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."

... snip
So the same jurisdiction thereof should also be applied to illegal alias residing in sanctuary cities.
__________________

Time to repeal the 17th.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to 9111315 For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 12:46 PM
HomeDefense's Avatar
HomeDefense HomeDefense is offline
Bad Dog
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hellfire, Arizona
Posts: 3,805
Thanks: 2,218
Thanked 15,250 Times in 3,271 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 9111315 View Post
So the same jurisdiction thereof should also be applied to illegal alias residing in sanctuary cities.
The part of the clause that states "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" refers to where their allegiance lies. Someone in the US illegally is not acting in a way that is "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. They are disregarding our laws.

It's the same with diplomats. They are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country.

That phrase does not refer to everyone living in the USA.

It would have been better if the politicians who wrote amendments to the Constitution did so in plain English, rather than in a cryptic language that's subject to misinterpretation.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to HomeDefense For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 04:10 PM
zumhug's Avatar
zumhug zumhug is offline
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Posts: 2,416
Thanks: 6,031
Thanked 4,233 Times in 1,557 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeDefense View Post
How is the 14th Amendment under attack when it has been intentionally misinterpreted for many years? The original intent for the 14th Amendment is clear and it was not to give birthright citizenship whenever anyone comes here and drops a baby.
So what you are saying is, you get to play fast and loose with the vernacular contained int eh 14th amendment.

It clearly states:
"ALL persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside" overruling the awful Dred Scott ruling.

You are also a proponent of Trump's continued attacks on the Second Amendment too.

Is Shall NOT Be Infringed intentionally misrepresented? Or does your absolute adoration for him excuse that breach on the Constitution as well?
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 04:16 PM
sabotage39k's Avatar
sabotage39k sabotage39k is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,087
Thanks: 3,176
Thanked 6,210 Times in 2,981 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeDefense View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9111315 View Post
So the same jurisdiction thereof should also be applied to illegal alias residing in sanctuary cities.
The part of the clause that states "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" refers to where their allegiance lies. Someone in the US illegally is not acting in a way that is "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. They are disregarding our laws.

It's the same with diplomats. They are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country.

That phrase does not refer to everyone living in the USA.

It would have been better if the politicians who wrote amendments to the Constitution did so in plain English, rather than in a cryptic language that's subject to misinterpretation.
No it doesn’t, but the term itself was initially implemented to address native Americans who were living within US but not under US jurisdiction. You are stating one interpretation of the statement. That is probably why legally it should be interpreted. But it makes sense that it was meant to encompasses jurisdictions within the US. Allegiance to another country is subjected. If said native born US citizen never step foot in their parent’s country of origin, how would they have allegiance? There would be record of them ever existing there. Doesn’t make sense.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 04:18 PM
zumhug's Avatar
zumhug zumhug is offline
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Posts: 2,416
Thanks: 6,031
Thanked 4,233 Times in 1,557 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmless Drudge View Post
Jus soli citizenship is nowhere found in the 14th Amendment.
"all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside"

Are you saying the Constitution says what it doesn't say? Or are you using Jus soli in a loose term to make your argument?

Because clearly, the Constitution and the 14the Amendment say ALL PERSONS.

Getting from all persons to Jus Soli as a viable defense is called something, what was that again, oh yeah, cognitive dissonance. That seems to happen a lot around here though.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 07:28 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is offline
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,854
Thanks: 11,167
Thanked 29,147 Times in 10,218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zumhug View Post
"all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside"

Are you saying the Constitution says what it doesn't say? Or are you using Jus soli in a loose term to make your argument?
No. YOU are projecting again, using Jus soli in a loose term to make your argument. Do you read "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the 14A? Illegal, by definition ARE NOT disqualified.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 07:44 PM
Basic Human Unit's Avatar
Basic Human Unit Basic Human Unit is online now
Retrofitted Sheeple
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27,761
Thanks: 67,861
Thanked 72,683 Times in 19,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
No. YOU are projecting again, using Jus soli in a loose term to make your argument. Do you read "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the 14A? Illegal, by definition ARE NOT disqualified.
Except the person born in the United States is not illegal. A birth canal is not an illegal entry point into the United States.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Basic Human Unit For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:07 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is offline
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,854
Thanks: 11,167
Thanked 29,147 Times in 10,218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Human Unit View Post
Except the person born in the United States is not illegal. A birth canal is not an illegal entry point into the United States.
No exception noted to 'subject to the jurisdiction' provision. The idea that one can illegally obtain legal status is one only lawless Leftists can embrace.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:10 PM
Basic Human Unit's Avatar
Basic Human Unit Basic Human Unit is online now
Retrofitted Sheeple
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27,761
Thanks: 67,861
Thanked 72,683 Times in 19,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
No exception noted to 'subject to the jurisdiction' provision. The idea that one can illegally obtain legal status is one only lawless Leftists can embrace.
What did the newborn infant do that was illegal?
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Basic Human Unit For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:19 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is offline
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,854
Thanks: 11,167
Thanked 29,147 Times in 10,218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Human Unit View Post
What did the newborn infant do that was illegal?
Crossed the border without legal authority. Try to keep up with the subject under discussion.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:45 PM
Basic Human Unit's Avatar
Basic Human Unit Basic Human Unit is online now
Retrofitted Sheeple
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27,761
Thanks: 67,861
Thanked 72,683 Times in 19,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
Crossed the border without legal authority. Try to keep up with the subject under discussion.
What border? There is no border being crossed when someone is born.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Basic Human Unit For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:47 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is offline
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,854
Thanks: 11,167
Thanked 29,147 Times in 10,218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Human Unit View Post
What border? There is no border being crossed when someone is born.
The USA has a border. IF it was crossed legally, then said person would be subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

Again, the idea that you suppose legal status for illegal actions tells the story.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 08:55 PM
Basic Human Unit's Avatar
Basic Human Unit Basic Human Unit is online now
Retrofitted Sheeple
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27,761
Thanks: 67,861
Thanked 72,683 Times in 19,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
The USA has a border. IF it was crossed legally, then said person would be subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

Again, the idea that you suppose legal status for illegal actions tells the story.
And what if no border was crossed? What if someone was born here?
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 08:59 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is offline
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,854
Thanks: 11,167
Thanked 29,147 Times in 10,218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Human Unit View Post
And what if no border was crossed? What if someone was born here?
A border was crossed. The border crossing was illegal.

Hey, this car is mine. Just because I obtained it illegally don't mean nothing!
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-25-2019, 09:05 PM
Basic Human Unit's Avatar
Basic Human Unit Basic Human Unit is online now
Retrofitted Sheeple
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27,761
Thanks: 67,861
Thanked 72,683 Times in 19,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
A border was crossed. The border crossing was illegal.
You're not making any sense. Birth canals aren't borders.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-25-2019, 09:16 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is offline
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,854
Thanks: 11,167
Thanked 29,147 Times in 10,218 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Human Unit View Post
You're not making any sense. Birth canals aren't borders.
I am making perfect sense. You are just being obtuse. The 14A was passed for freed slaves who were under the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals, by definition, are not subject to the US. Are you familiar with the fruit of the poisonous tree?

The trouble with Liberals is they want to make it up as they go. Rules - including word meaning - are already established.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 08-26-2019, 12:52 AM
TRyan's Avatar
TRyan TRyan is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: California
Posts: 8,066
Thanks: 6,130
Thanked 27,262 Times in 6,480 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Basic Human Unit View Post
What border? There is no border being crossed when someone is born.
I suppose by this way of rationalizing it if the mother was gunned down by border patrol stationed in sniper towers before she crossed the border it would only be one murder not two?
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to TRyan For This Useful Post:
Old 08-26-2019, 01:17 AM
Basic Human Unit's Avatar
Basic Human Unit Basic Human Unit is online now
Retrofitted Sheeple
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 27,761
Thanks: 67,861
Thanked 72,683 Times in 19,550 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRyan View Post
I suppose by this way of rationalizing it if the mother was gunned down by border patrol stationed in sniper towers before she crossed the border it would only be one murder not two?
Yes. But in a fully functional criminal justice system, one murder ought to be enough.
Quick reply to this message
Old 08-26-2019, 02:36 AM
zumhug's Avatar
zumhug zumhug is offline
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: United States
Posts: 2,416
Thanks: 6,031
Thanked 4,233 Times in 1,557 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
I am making perfect sense. You are just being obtuse. The 14A was passed for freed slaves who were under the jurisdiction of the US. Illegals, by definition, are not subject to the US. Are you familiar with the fruit of the poisonous tree?

The trouble with Liberals is they want to make it up as they go. Rules - including word meaning - are already established.
You have the market cornered on being obtuse.
The trouble with people like you is the inability to grasp facts. When presented with them, you play the liberal card and make yourself look foolish.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to zumhug For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net