Illogical comparison aside, you love the 2nd amendment and all its ambiguity, but you don't like the 14th amendment and its very clear and direct wording?
Just want to make sure that I understand your stance on the United States Constitution…
From the "What were they thinking file?!?"
- Thread starter SCEMan
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Just want to make sure that I understand your stance on the United States Constitution…
MrAl
Flashlight Enthusiast
Your quote of John Cleese is so true isn't it? That's amazing.
Maybe it's also partly like, "The world is very stupid with tiny bits of intelligence now and then" ha.
Could it be we are beginning to experience the dawn of reverse evolution? 🙂
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
Give me your address, and I'll squat the hell out of your property. And I'll bring some thug buddies to start distributing certain unmentionable substances, and some innocents so you'll feel bad for kicking everyone out. Unless you don't want people tresspassing your established borders, throwing rocks at your fences, kids trampling your lawn, etc etc?
And if you rent, well, that's unfortunate, we'll be sharing your living quarters indefinitely, without your permission, but I'll pay my portion of the bills while doing God knows what under your jurisdiction. Oh wait, I just decided I wont be contributing to the bills because theyre in YOUR name, not mine, and I'm not even on the lease.
I think that's a better analogy.
I suppose I'll ask presumptuously and condescendingly...are you from Commieda?
Seriously, exactly what was Brett Baier thinking when he asked Donald Trump in Sunday's Fox News interview about grocery prices?
BRET BAIER: You said that tariff is a beautiful word. There are some signs in the market, consumer confidence that they're a little jittery. So, if all goes to plan, when do you think families would be able to feel prices going down, groceries, energy? Or are you kind of saying to them, hang on, inflation may get worse until it gets better?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: No, I think we're going to become a rich – and look, we're not that rich right now. We owe $36 trillion. That's because we let all these nations take advantage of us. Same thing, like 200 billion with Canada. We owe 300 – we have a deficit with Mexico of $350 billion. I'm not going to do that. I'm not going to let that happen.
Ummm…🤔
Uncle Joe was the dummy, huh? 🤫
BRET BAIER: You said that tariff is a beautiful word. There are some signs in the market, consumer confidence that they're a little jittery. So, if all goes to plan, when do you think families would be able to feel prices going down, groceries, energy? Or are you kind of saying to them, hang on, inflation may get worse until it gets better?
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: No, I think we're going to become a rich – and look, we're not that rich right now. We owe $36 trillion. That's because we let all these nations take advantage of us. Same thing, like 200 billion with Canada. We owe 300 – we have a deficit with Mexico of $350 billion. I'm not going to do that. I'm not going to let that happen.
Ummm…🤔
Uncle Joe was the dummy, huh? 🤫
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington DC 20500
So, do you agree with what the 14th amendment says? 😆
Last edited:
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
Yes, when it is read in context and entirety.
"Citizen" is the operative word, and is defined as in the first line of the amendment.
Edit**
Thankfully, the Constitution is a living document, but that's not to imply non-contextual delineation.
What exactly then does the 14th amendment say about people born in the United States? Section 1 specifically, as that is the part of the Amendment that deals with people born in the United States….
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
That does not apply to the people who came here illegally, but to the child they birth on U.S. soil. Perhaps you are okay with the separation of children from parents?
Nobody is speaking about people that came here illegally, except for you. I am speaking of Trump’s desire to try to end the constitutionality of birthright citizenship.
Just so we are crystal clear.
Just so we are crystal clear.
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
Post number 921, you directly responded to bykfixer's remark about illegals, so yes, by inference and implication, YOU WERE definitely addressing that whole scope.
Calm down, because your adrenaline spiked kneejerking is biting you in the behind. Calm, collected responses work better for communication.
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
I guess it's simpler to restate my question. What would you do if a foreign couple had a child on U.S. soil? Temporary visas until the child is of legal age, then send the parents back? Or more pragmatically, and perfectly in line with the Constitution, would you legally separate the parents from the child and put the child through the system and deport the parents?
Or perhaps, possibly the most fair, would you provide a US birth cert and assurance that the child IS a properly documented US citizen, then send them all back?
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
Or perhaps you're clacking away doing illegal stuff right now because you're angry? I dunno. FBI always watching FYI.
Just so we are again crystal clear, the implication in post #921 was since a calf born on his side of the fence wouldn’t be his, neither should the child of an illegal immigrant have citizenship. I was responding to that idea and that idea only. Perhaps I read it wrong, but I don’t think so.
This was entirely what my 14th Amendment response was pointed towards.
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
Thank you for clarifying. On that aspect alone, yes, I agree with the Constitution as it is contextually written.
I fully disagree with President Trump's executive order to end that birthright citizenship, but can see why he wants to. How do you solve an illegal alien issue? Remove the motivation or incentive to come illegally.
The danger lies in the way it is written, as it would imply that grandfathering of the clause may not apply to current birthright citizenship, not even his own.
Last edited:
Honestly, as someone unassociated with this (I’m a citizen by birth to parents who were citizens by birth to parents who were citizens by birth to parents, who were citizens by birth, as nauseam), I’m uncertain how to go about dealing with the parents of a child with Constitutionally guaranteed birthright citizenship.
I do, however, believe it is not within the power of an executive order to delete parts of the constitution that someone or some group of people don’t agree with.
For someone who claims to be so level-headed and intelligent, the idea that a president can bypass the US Constitution with the of stroke of a pen is 100% illogical and anyone with any sort of honest gumption about them would agree with such a statement.
Might I suggest an option for folks
Put wacbzz on ignore, it has worked well for me, and I don't have to deal with his ridiculous BS
Just a suggestion
Put wacbzz on ignore, it has worked well for me, and I don't have to deal with his ridiculous BS
Just a suggestion
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
As mentioned earlier, the Constitution is a living document. There may be stuff in there that is no longer relative to us, such as fair racial or ownership practices, so on and so forth. While it's good to leave them archived for posterity, would it be antagonistic to strike them in the legal sense?
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
We're all being respectful now lol, de-escalation successful!
dc38
Flashlight Enthusiast
Also, to be fair, the Constitution was borne by the flourish of a pen...it stands to reason that it could be changed by one 😈
Well, there are four ways the Constitution can be amended, but an executive order is not one of them. 😉
(Tongue in check, I know 👍)
Latest posts
-
Recommend me a flashlight please - for a Detective- Latest: scalpel_ninja
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
