Trump Blasts U.S. Anchor Baby Policy: ‘You’re Violating Something Very Sacred, You’re Violating a B

[rangerrebew]

Trump Blasts U.S. Anchor Baby Policy: ‘You’re Violating Something Very Sacred, You’re Violating a Border’
 

by John Binder6 Apr 2018New Orleans, LA7,068

President Trump blasted the United States’ birthright citizenship policy whereby the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens are given automatic American citizenship, noting that illegal aliens are “violating a border.”

During a roundtable discussion in West Virginia, Trump slammed the birthright citizenship policy — illegal aliens’ children are commonly referred to as “anchor babies” — noting that fellow Western nations do not have such a policy.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/04/06/trump-blasts-u-s-anchor-baby-policy-youre-violating-something-very-sacred-youre-violating-a-border/

[aligncare]

So, let’s say an American couple can’t get an immigration visa to live in France. But, they really want to live there, so they sneak in to France. They celebrate their successful entry with a bottle of champagne and nooky. Nine months later she delivers a baby. Can that baby be considered French?

To extend this illustration a bit, let’s say the couple are given citizenship through a general amnesty, they learn to speak French and live the rest of their lives in France as productive citizens.

Do you know that through their whole lives, and even upon their deaths, they will still not ever be considered “French.”

Only in America can immigrants, through naturalization, become “Americans.”

[catfish1957]

Trump Blasts U.S. Anchor Baby Policy: ‘You’re Violating Something Very Sacred, You’re Violating a Border’
 

by John Binder6 Apr 2018New Orleans, LA7,068

President Trump blasted the United States’ birthright citizenship policy whereby the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens are given automatic American citizenship, noting that illegal aliens are “violating a border.”

During a roundtable discussion in West Virginia, Trump slammed the birthright citizenship policy — illegal aliens’ children are commonly referred to as “anchor babies” — noting that fellow Western nations do not have such a policy.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/04/06/trump-blasts-u-s-anchor-baby-policy-youre-violating-something-very-sacred-youre-violating-a-border/

ARGHHHHHH!!!!!!   That's 3 things I agree with DJT in two days..     Someone get me some soap to get this orange off.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

That's not a policy, that's actually written out in the Constitution.

[massadvj]

So, let’s say an American couple can’t get an immigration visa to live in France. But, they really want to live there, so they sneak in to France. They celebrate their successful entry with a bottle of champagne and nooky. Nine months later she delivers a baby. Can that baby be considered French?

To extend this illustration a bit, let’s say the couple are given citizenship through a general amnesty, they learn to speak French and live the rest of their lives in France as productive citizens.

Do you know that through their whole lives, and even upon their deaths, they will still not ever be considered “French.”

Only in America can immigrants, through naturalization, become “Americans.”

Do we really want France's immigration policy?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andyjsemotiuk/2018/01/17/france-struggles-with-its-immigrants-in-the-midst-of-national-security-concerns/#16ed2b135efc

Not saying our policy is right.  It is the result of one very opportunistic party insisting that anyone coming here illegally get the "right" instantly to vote for its political class.  But going the other way and enforcing a no citizenship policy has very bad implications as well.  Whether they get citizenship or not (I say not) these "anchor babies" need to be able to access the American dream, else we end up becoming France or Israel, with millions having to be kept in de facto concentration camps to protect our security.

[endicom]

That's not a policy, that's actually written out in the Constitution.

14th Amendment which was meant to give full rights to former slaves.

[Sanguine]

14th Amendment which was meant to give full rights to former slaves.

Exactly.

[LauraTXNM]

People who prefer a French immigration policy over the American one might like to speak to some of my friends whose ancestors came here in the 1800s and were denied citizenship for 75+ years.  I don't think anyone who comes here LEGALLY should be denied the opportunity for citizenship.

[Cyber Liberty]

People who prefer a French immigration policy over the American one might like to speak to some of my friends whose ancestors came here in the 1800s and were denied citizenship for 75+ years.  I don't think anyone who comes here LEGALLY should be denied the opportunity for citizenship.

Japan is even worse.  You could have lived there for generations and you would never be considered "Japanese."  It's a racial thing more than a legal thing.  I don't know what their legal system for citizenship is, that may be easy, I'm just talking about how the people will treat you.

[GtHawk]

So, let’s say an American couple can’t get an immigration visa to live in France. But, they really want to live there, so they sneak in to France. They celebrate their successful entry with a bottle of champagne and nooky. Nine months later she delivers a baby. Can that baby be considered French?

To extend this illustration a bit, let’s say the couple are given citizenship through a general amnesty, they learn to speak French and live the rest of their lives in France as productive citizens.

Do you know that through their whole lives, and even upon their deaths, they will still not ever be considered “French.”

Only in America can immigrants, through naturalization, become “Americans.”

How about a more realistic scenario(kudos to Bill Maxwell), an American women at full term of her pregnancy waddles across the French border and pops the Parker House Roll she's been baking  out of her oven, is that roll magically transformed into French Baguette just because it crossed the border? Because as we all know that's exactly what happens with foreign nationals and America because of the bastardization of the 14th Amendment.

[berdie]

People who prefer a French immigration policy over the American one might like to speak to some of my friends whose ancestors came here in the 1800s and were denied citizenship for 75+ years.  I don't think anyone who comes here LEGALLY should be denied the opportunity for citizenship.

I was unaware that someone applying for citizenship that came here legally and did what they should was denied that opportunity.

Can you tell me of a current example @LauraTXNM ?

[LauraTXNM]

I was unaware that someone applying for citizenship that came here legally and did what they should was denied that opportunity.

Can you tell me of a current example @LauraTXNM ?

@berdie, Sorry I missed your response before!  Apologies; I was being kind of snarky ;(.  No, I was thinking about a couple of (Chinese) American friends whose ancestors came here in the 1850s and 1880s.  These guys were denied the ability to ever become citizens, although their kids were covered under the 14th Amendment.  Of course, it was hard for them to actually have kids when they couldn't marry white women and couldn't bring Chinese wives over.  We really, really didn't like Asians for a while.

[LauraTXNM]

Japan is even worse.  You could have lived there for generations and you would never be considered "Japanese."  It's a racial thing more than a legal thing.  I don't know what their legal system for citizenship is, that may be easy, I'm just talking about how the people will treat you.

@Cyber Liberty  You're absolutely right about Japan!  Aren't there even Japanese minority ethnic groups that are treated that way?

[Sighlass]

Rare agreement with Trump on this. The 14th has been taken out of original intent. It was not meant as it is now being used.

[Sanguine]

@berdie, Sorry I missed your response before!  Apologies; I was being kind of snarky ;(.  No, I was thinking about a couple of (Chinese) American friends whose ancestors came here in the 1850s and 1880s.  These guys were denied the ability to ever become citizens, although their kids were covered under the 14th Amendment.  Of course, it was hard for them to actually have kids when they couldn't marry white women and couldn't bring Chinese wives over.  We really, really didn't like Asians for a while.

And, I'm pretty sure that you couldn't even move to China permanently, were you an American, much less have citizen children.  Different times all over.

[Fishrrman]

Laura wrote above:
"These guys were denied the ability to ever become citizens, although their kids were covered under the 14th Amendment.  Of course, it was hard for them to actually have kids when they couldn't marry white women and couldn't bring Chinese wives over.  We really, really didn't like Asians for a while."

In Japan, they really, really don't like non-Japanese even TODAY.
It remains nigh-impossible for anyone who is not ethnic Japanese to become a Japanese citizen. They simply don't permit this.

The Japanese understand the importance about protecting their ethnicity, culture and country.

Japan will -still be- "Japan", populated by "Japanese", long after the white Christians of Western Europe have disappeared, perhaps even after the people who built America have been "replaced", as well.

Should we blame the Japanese for wanting to remain "who they are"?
If the answer is no, why must WE accept a different fate?