Amnesty and my membership in the Republican party

[Alex]

Pretty much what scaeagles said.

A pregnant woman comes here on vacation from Ireland with her husband and two other children. She goes into early labor while visiting the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and delivers a beautiful boy. Why is that kid an American?

A very late term Russian woman is flying from Novosibirsk to Toronto to visit her sister and goes into labor and delivers on the plane while it is in Alaskan airspace. Why is that kid an American citizen?

You say it is a puzzling concept but the majority of the world does not work under the same system we do. Jus soli (right of soil) is common in the Western Hemisphere but is a byproduct of an earlier era when populations were low. It is something we inherited from the United Kingdom and they it it 25 years ago (you must now be born to a legal resident). India, Ireland, and New Zealand are all countries that used to be on our system but have changed to san sanguinus (right of bloos) so that you are only automatically a citizen if born to at least one citizen parent.

This is by far the standard form of bestowing citizenship (in the United States we are both; if born abroad to American parents you are a citizen, if born domestically to foreign parents you are a citizen).

Here's a list (accumulated through Wikipedia) of various countries and how they handle citizenship by birth. We're pretty much in the oddball camp as far as the world is concerned.

Nations that require being born to a citizen to be a native-born citizen
Australia, Austria, Belarus, China, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, India, Israel, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malta, Morocco (only through the father), Nepal, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, The Netherlands, Turkey

Nations that require being born to a legal resident meeting some requirements to be a native-born citizen
Belgium, France, Malaysia (not based on parental residency but on personal residency of 6 years after birth), Portugal, South Africa, United Kingdom,

Nations that simply require being born on domestic soil to be a native-born citizen
Brazil, Canada, Greece, Lithuania, Peru, South Korea (but only if other citizenships are renounced), United States

Other
Liberian citizenship is only available to black Africans. And native born rights are only passed by birth to a citizen.

Quite a few countries will also allow you to "reclaim" citizenship if you can show a sufficient historical ethnic or national connection.

[Morrigoon]

The national ID card interferes with freedom once you can't leave the house without it. You are then not free to walk the streets without your "papers" very commie/nazi. I fear if we institute a national ID card, it will somehow become mandatory that we have them on our person at all times. And don't try to compare that to a driver's license, because we only need that if we're operating a motor vehicle.

I DO feel less free because of all the hassle they have added to travel. I am not free to just pack a bag, buy a ticket, and step on a plane. I am now told how to pack my bag (eg: liquids in a ziploc bag or don't carry them), I am forced to remove my shoes and let my sweaty socks mingle with the humid impressions of so many hundreds of hot stockinged feet before me as I step through a metal detector, I am checked, and rechecked for my identity, and for good measure, checked again. I now have to arrive 2 hours before a flight to have a chance of making it through security in time for a flight that may last half that time. I do NOT feel free.

I don't even feel free on the net anymore, thanks to the Patriot Act. I think you'll find many Americans who no longer feel free to joke about certain topics lest it trigger some sort of "search" by the FBI, the records of which could hinder future ability to get certain jobs (I've had many jobs that required FBI background checks). No longer free to read certain books even out of curiosity, no longer free to search certain keywords on the internet, etc.

Am I doing anything wrong? No. But fear of being wrongly accused or even of having to go through the process of defending myself for doing nothing wrong restricts my freedoms. I can't satisfy my curiosity about the Anarchists' Cookb0ok (do I have the name right?) for fear of being mistaken for a terrorist.

The forefathers saw this, that's why the wrote the constitution, and it stood for freedom until big-brother (sorry, big-government) politicians decided to undermine it in a big power grab, aided by fearful peasants.

[scaeagles]

Of course they can. They can do a lot of stuff that they don't necessarily do.

I would extend my earlier public/private to include my person. My person is private unless there is probable cuase to determine otherwise.

And I agree, Morrigoon - I'm not wanting to carry my "papers" at all times.

However, do you have a "right" to fly? Is it worth enough to you to fly to go through the added security? Apparently so. How did this impose upon your freedom to go where you wanted? Were you told you coudn't go or delayed?

Too many people confuse inconvenience with restriction of freedoms.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

do you have a "right" to fly? Is it worth enough to you to fly to go through the added security? Apparently so. How did this impose upon your freedom to go where you wanted? Were you told you coudn't go or delayed?

Have you ever heard of the No-Fly List? Are you aware that it's absurdly easy to be almost arbitrarily put on this List, and next to impossible to get yourself off?

The draconian measures you seem to view as at least a crease in the sand are happenening.

Perhaps on a smaller scale than a police state, but they've begun nonetheless. And the people who put them in place, and many who would come into power after them, would not stop at requiring you to have your papers on you at all times.


(And far worse, I'm afraid)

[Kevy Baby]

And to add to the flying issue: there are other forms of transportation (train, bus, automobile, etc.).

Too often we confuse "rights" with "privileges." Flying is a privilege. Driving is a privilege. Feeling safe in your home is a right. Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure is a right. Security checks for flights is not an unreasonable search.

[scaeagles]

I just read something i found to be humorous from a column by Thomas Sowell -

Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented worker' is like calling a drug dealer an 'unlicensed pharmacist.'

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I just read something i found to be humorous from a column by Thomas Sowell -

Except that the work that the illegals do is legal necessary work. The majority of abused drugs can't be sold by pharmacists even with a prescription. I suppose if recreational drugs were ever legalized, there would still be a street trade devoted to undercutting the prices passed down by the drug companies to the pharmacists. Then you'd hear the drug companies complain about the street dealers the way the white and black working class complain about the Latinos.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

Except that the work that the illegals do is legal necessary work.

More to the point, not everyone who is working illegally is in the country illegally.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

Except that the work that the illegals do is legal necessary work. The majority of abused drugs can't be sold by pharmacists even with a prescription. I suppose if recreational drugs were ever legalized, there would still be a street trade devoted to undercutting the prices passed down by the drug companies to the pharmacists. Then you'd hear the drug companies complain about the street dealers the way the white and black working class complain about the Latinos.

Umm...Strangler....it was meant to be humorous not literal. That's why I said I found it to be humorous.

And I respectfully disagree that it is the white and black working class complaining about the Latinos. A large portion of hispanics that are here legally have problems with hispanic illegals. And while hispanics no doubt represent the vast majority, the objection is to illegal immigration from anywhere regardless of race.

The biggest opponent of illegal immigration was a hispanic labor organizer that is honored here in AZ named Cesar Chavez. He understood that every illegal immigrant working here drove down the wages for those that were here legally, and he encouraged those he organized to turn in the illegals and have them deported.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

Except that the work that the illegals do is legal necessary work. The majority of abused drugs can't be sold by pharmacists even with a prescription. I suppose if recreational drugs were ever legalized, there would still be a street trade devoted to undercutting the prices passed down by the drug companies to the pharmacists. Then you'd hear the drug companies complain about the street dealers the way the white and black working class complain about the Latinos.

The example of alcohol and cigarettes (our two widely available legal drugs) would seem to argue against this.

While there is a certain black market for these products it is minimal and rather than attempting to undercut the manufacturer it is almost entirely focused on avoiding the taxes.