Draggingtree Posted August 24, 2015 Share Posted August 24, 2015 : Of The Currant Citizenship ControversyThose proclaiming “Birthright Citizenship” are wrong By: 1stRichard (Diary) | August 23rd, 2015 at 04:16 PM On one side we have those proclaiming “Birthright Citizenship” or jus sanguinis as the law of the land here in the United States, an unconditional basis for citizenship as such as anyone born in this territory has citizenship. However, “Birthright Citizenship” is not actually “Birthplace Citizenship” or jus soli and ought not to be confused with jus sanguinis as is this side of the debate. This side also seems to think that the currant controversy is something new but it is not as this controversy was in our Declaration of Independence as we declared our independence from jus soli, perpetual allegiance to the king’s dominion. The Birthright side also takes snippets of history, court opinions that are known to be wrong and conflicting and attempts to change the meaning of words. As for “anchor babies” this side believes the parents do not own the child they had given birth to, but this baby is a government subject owing perpetual allegiance and forever bound to those laws if that child was born on the soil thereof. This is wrong, parents ought to own their children and be subjects thereof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now