If you want to insure Liberty reigns we have to reduce and control Immigration

[AmericanSpartan]

1) Illegal immigrants aren't eligible for federal government aid.

Anchor babies get welfare that their parents claim/use. So once again you lie.

http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Legal-Illegal-Immigrant-Households

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...nomic-costs-birthright-citizenship-ian-tuttle

2) we already have a wall

No, we do not, not a full border wall that is meant to stop, it is half asleep and was designed to slow them down as fear of lawsuits was a very real issue.

3) end birthright? I thought you were a Constitutionalist. It is in there.

Once again do not understand its meaning or intent.


This claim plays off a widespread ignorance about the meaning of the word “jurisdiction.” It fails to recognize that the same word covers two distinctly different ideas: 1) complete, political jurisdiction; and 2) partial, territorial jurisdiction. Think of it this way. When a British tourist visits the United States, he subjects himself to our laws as long as he remains within our borders. He must drive on the right side of the road, for example. He is subject to our partial, territorial jurisdiction, but he does not thereby subject himself to our complete, political jurisdiction. He does not get to vote, or serve on a jury; he cannot be drafted into our armed forces; and he cannot be prosecuted for treason if he takes up arms against us, because he owes us no allegiance. He is merely a “temporary sojourner,” to use the language employed by those who wrote the 14th Amendment, and not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States in the full and complete sense intended by that language in the 14th Amendment.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...-also-reforming-birthright-citizenship-john-c


In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:

"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."

This understanding was reaffirmed by Senator Edward Cowan, who stated:

"[A foreigner in the United States] has a right to the protection of the laws; but he is not a citizen in the ordinary acceptance of the word..."

The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.

4) E-verify. National ID cards and checks. Turn employers and schools into government police agents.

No it merely allows them to make in informed decision and freely associate based on that information.

5) reduce immigration in number and scope. Net migration from Mexico (legal and illegal) hit zero a few years ago. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/04/23/net-migration-from-mexico-falls-to-zero-and-perhaps-less/

We still take in too many in number from cultures non compatible with our own.

Think capping at 200,000 per year is a great number, mandate skilled labor or people of means along with a few other screening methods along with the measures to end illegal immigration and we are set.

 

[ProIndividual]

Do you believe in national defense? Do you believe that anyone should be allowed to walk into this nation? Do you believe cultures and people are interchangeable?

Do you believe in any role of goverment? I think you a confused anarchist.

"Whoso is full of sacred (religious, moral, humane) love loves only the spook, the “true man,” and persecutes with dull mercilessness the individual, the real man." --- Max Stirner

Your patriotism (the nationalist love, which is religious because the state is a "god") idealizes the native (the "true man"), and with dull mercilessness persecutes the real man (the individuals, native or otherwise, whose rights you trample in your mission to preserve and love the "true man"). The man you wish to preserve is illusory (a spook)...the people whose rights you shit on are very real.

 

[AmericanSpartan]

"Whoso is full of sacred (religious, moral, humane) love loves only the spook, the “true man,” and persecutes with dull mercilessness the individual, the real man." --- Max Stirner

Your patriotism (the nationalist love, which is religious because the state is a "god") idealizes the native (the "true man"), and with dull mercilessness persecutes the real man (the individuals, native or otherwise, whose rights you trample in your mission to preserve and love the "true man"). The man you wish to preserve is illusory (a spook)...the people whose rights you shit on are very real.

Once again projecting your views into what I say. The state is not God, it is but tool that man has made, we can use to our ends for a handful of just causes and tasks or it can be used as a weapon to be wielded against freemen.