Do you think all migrants, no migrants or some migrants should be vetted before entering the USA?

[opinterph]

The definition has changed over time. Take your pick. Your definition doesn't work. The one in the image I posted does work.

That's the bigger point. It would help if we were all talking about the same thing or at least understood how the other person interprets the term.

 

[peeonme]

That's the bigger point. It would help if we were all talking about the same thing or at least understood how the other person interprets the term.

If you are posting about the term that is used in reference to babies born in the USA, then in context it is in reference to illegal aliens giving birth to babies in the USA. Like t or not, Trump and Co. does not fit that definition.

Used to refer to a child born to a non-citizen mother in a country which has birthright citizenship, especially when viewed as providing an advantage to family members seeking to secure citizenship or legal residency.

 

[opinterph]

… illegal aliens giving birth to babies in the USA.

If my cousin is visiting from Brazil and she unexpectedly gives birth before her return home, I am offended that you refer to her as an “illegal alien.” Please explain more specifically what you mean by that term.

 

[rareboy]

The world has changed a lot in the past 50-100 years, don't you think? Globalists have made sure of that.

You should have heard some of my family when your people turned up. Here we had created a paradise on earth for Englishmen of some wealth and refinement and suddenly the refuse of Eastern Europe and Russia was tossed up on the shore (paraphrasing what they probably said to be sure).

So no.

It seems like nothing has changed.

 

[peeonme]

If my cousin is visiting from Brazil and she unexpectedly gives birth before her return home, I am offended that you refer to her as an “illegal alien.” Please explain more specifically what you mean by that term.

If she is visiting she came in via a passport and is here legally. That is far different than one who comes into a country illegally. Nothing to be offended about.
I am offended that one would pick on a 12 year old boy and call him an anchor baby.

 

[mikey3000]

If my cousin is visiting from Brazil and she unexpectedly gives birth before her return home, I am offended that you refer to her as an “illegal alien.” Please explain more specifically what you mean by that term.

A "visitor" from another country is not considered a migrant and definitely is not entitled to birthright citizenship.

 

[opinterph]

A "visitor" from another country is not considered a migrant

Precision in speech helps us to clearly communicate. Using migrant in place of immigrant does not lend itself to better understand the issue being discussed.

 

[gsdx]

Precision in speech helps us to clearly communicate. Using migrant in place of immigrant does not lend itself to better understand the issue being discussed.

Indeed. Migrants and immigrants are not the same thing. Ontario gets, on average, 25,000 migrant workers from the Caribbean and Central America every year. And migrants don't necessarily have to come from other countries. Anyone who moves about to 'follow the work' are migrants.

 

[mikey3000]

Precision in speech helps us to clearly communicate. Using migrant in place of immigrant does not lend itself to better understand the issue being discussed.

I agree that precision in speech helps us to clearly communication, but you used the word "visitor" to describe your sister from Brazil, not me. A visitor is neither a migrant nor an immigrant, just merely a visitor. I understand the issue being discussed just fine, thank you. The masses who will be breaking down your southern door are also not migrants, they are immigrants who must follow America's immigration laws. Obama made a massive error in judgement by saying not to inforce immigration laws. MASSIVE! It amounts to treason and he should be prosecuted for it. Now everyone thinks that American immigration laws don't apply to them. Good luck with that.

 

[peeonme]

If Bill Clinton said illegal alien, then I think I can say it.

 

[cityboy-stl]

Precision in speech helps us to clearly communicate. Using migrant in place of immigrant does not lend itself to better understand the issue being discussed.

In the same vein, birthright is a right that one acquires by virtue of ones own existence through birth. You cannot deny a legal birthright to one person, a baby in this instance, based on the birth status of another (the parent). It is contradictory to the word birthright. The 14th amendment gives birthright citizenship to all persons born on U.S. soil. That's is an indisputable fact.

Whether you approve of birthright citizenship is not relevant to its legality. It is perfectly fine to have the discussion whether birthright citizenship is appropriate and under what circumstances it should be applied. Those circumstances should be discussed.

This particular statement by Mikey is quite ambiguous: A "visitor" from another country is not considered a migrant and definitely is not entitled to birthright citizenship." Assuming we are talking about U.S. and not Canadian citizenship, the statement is factually false. The child of a visitor is entitled to birthright citizenship by the 14th amendment. Like it or not, that is the reality.

Hoping to improve precision and based on context and I believe Mikey's intent was to say "The child of a visitor to the US....definitely should not be entitled to birthright citizenship." Would that be a correct interpretation? That makes the statement an opinion. A constitutional amendment would be required to it to fact.

Would you please verify that is your intent? I'm not sure I will receive an answer to that question because so far very few of my questions have even been acknowledged much less answered.

 

[mikey3000]

Here we had created a paradise on earth for Englishmen of some wealth and refinement and suddenly the refuse of Eastern Europe and Russia was tossed up on the shore (paraphrasing what they probably said to be sure.)

Well, we all know how hospitable and resourcefull the English are. Luckily there weren't many in western Canada at the turn of the last century, so yeah, you are welcome.

 

[opinterph]

Obama made a massive error in [judgment] by saying not to [enforce] immigration laws. MASSIVE! It amounts to treason and he should be prosecuted for it.

That’s yet another topic deviation, unless you can demonstrate how it is relevant to our somewhat wavering discussion about whom among us should require vetting. Thus far in this thread we have identified: migrants, no migrants, some migrants, native peoples, immigrants, anchor babies, native born citizens, naturalized citizens, asylum seekers, families, sponsored relatives, refugees, friends, illegal aliens, and visitors.

It appears that you are particularly opposed to the parent(s) of a child who obtained citizenship via birthright being somehow entitled to join in US citizenship as a result of that child. Your presentation suggests that you somewhat oppose birthright citizenship, but are more strongly opposed to chain migration.

And while your opinions about citizenship are interesting in that perhaps they inform your opinion about vetting – the only position you’ve put forth about <whatever name designation or category we use to describe people entering the US> is that they “should be vetted for criminal activity and health concerns.” Is there anything else we should consider for which they might also need to be vetted?

 

[rareboy]

Well, we all know how hospitable and resourcefull the English are. Luckily there weren't many in western Canada at the turn of the last century, so yeah, you are welcome.

I see that the point either flew about 1000 metres over your head, or you purposely are missing it.

In any event. The irony. It burns,

 

[mikey3000]

That’s yet another topic deviation, unless you can demonstrate how it is relevant to our somewhat wavering discussion about whom among us should require vetting.

You really don't think there is a connection between your ex president declaring not to enforce immigration laws and the mass of illegal immigrants pounding down your back door? You think it's a topic deviation?

 

[cityboy-stl]

I don't think President Obama has anything to do with this discussion of how many immigrants should be vetted. You started the topic...stay on it.

This is why you can't have a discussion with "conservatives". You ask questions but they're never actually willing to discuss anything.

 

[peeonme]

I don't care who is President (or who was) we need to have a policy in place that favors immigrants with no criminal history that are able to contribute to the system.
Also, birthright should not be messed with and children who were brought to our nation at a young age, grew up as Americans should be given a choice of becoming citizens, being documented workers or leaving.
I am in favor of an amnesty plan that would allow illegals a chance to become legal if they have no criminal record beyond a traffic citation or a misdemeanor.
Put a fair, decent plan in place and make it the law and enforce it.
As of now this is no more than A POLITICAL FOOTBALL.

 

[mikey3000]

Ok, why don't YOU think that these illegals immigrants should be vetted?

 

[Thad1527]

It's in the Constitution, 14th amendment...if you're born in the USA, you're a citizen.
And how cold is it to feel otherwise? You're born here...you are one of us. Welcome. I wouldn't push you out

 

[mikey3000]

I don't care who is President (or who was) we need to have a policy in place that favors immigrants with no criminal history that are able to contribute to the system.

You already have that, a good set of immigration laws, but they have to be enforced.