Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
Some other relatives I don’t know too well, fled Germany during WWII. They had it the worst from what I understand. Not because of the immigration process but, for simply being German during that time period.
The thing most don’t understand is a huge portion of the German people didn’t have a choice but, to fight. It was either fight or, grandma is getting dumped over the balcony in her wheelchair.
Seems like pretty much every nationality has been through the grinder over here at one time or another...some more than others.
When my mother was 9 years old she came home from school one day, and her mother said "We will no longer speak German, anywhere".
They lived in south Texas, and it was my mother's great grandfather who immigrated in the 1800's.
He got here before Texas became a state.
Rough times even for citizens.
It normally takes 7 to 10 years to become a US citizen. To me that is more than reasonable.
The Shop
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Free shipping: VITALMX
If an illegal alien broke into your home and had a baby, you gonna let her live there and pay all her expenses?
If not , why ?
Common sense gets a downvote. Welcome to Vital.
Well, when she was in office, she said "the border was secure." 😂🤡
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1EMjTAUiUe/
My money is on Lumpy.
My family settled in Pennsylvania. Then, in the early 60’s my grandfather headed to California looking for work as a plumber. Found it and, brought his family back with him.
There’s loopholes in everything. The problem is, those loopholes are being exploited.
It’s not like the mothers are coming here by themselves for the most part to give birth to their children.
Guess it depends on what planet she is from or what color she is?
Just for fun, let’s go out on a limb here, and say she’s from Planet Earth, and her color doesn’t factor in at all. The only thing that matters is the fact that she is not from our country.
Are you going to let her and her baby live with you? And her relatives that she wants to bring as well?
After all, she did give birth to a baby in your house.
I think you’d have to go by what the Constitution says about that sort of occurrence?
There are as many constitutional scholars that interpret it one way as there is another.
So by the way you and Lumpy want it interpreted, what is your answer?
My guess is you won’t give us a clear answer.
No, there isn’t anything in the Constitution concerning the question you tried to use.
I guess you’re using the loophole in the question
Seems like I guessed right.
Not sure what you’re talking about, but since you’re trying to make a point in the thread about birthright citizenship, it appears that you are trying to make an analogy. As an analogy, the first answer to your question should be another question and it should be the same as the first answer to the question about birthright citizenship; “What does the Constitution say?”
Pit Row
Not sure what I’m talking about? BS.
You knew exactly where I was going and you are trying to be cute.
Let’s start again here.
Answer this if you’ve got the balls.
Not having anything to do with the constitution, would you allow someone who was in our country illegally to stay in your house, if they broke into it and gave birth to a baby?
I'll answer it because I have no clue what you are trying to do.
NO
Now what?
If you really can’t figure it out I was trying to show the hypocrisy of someone supporting Birthright citizenship but wouldn’t take in someone in that situation.
Yes, it’s an analogy, so everyone is clear.
And next someone will say “but it’s constitutional” , which is why I brought up a few posts up that there is disagreement in the constitutionality of it.
No loophole, the Constitutional question is the foundation of the issue.
So, avoiding the question. Got it. 👌🏼
You seem to be conflating those of us who agree with the ruling as also being supporters of BC. Not the case. I have not seen anybody in this thread that is for BC as it is written in the constitution.
Not really. Just acknowledging that the analogies aren’t really that close.
Most people understand that there are times and circumstances where the government may enact eminent domain over someone’s property for things like roads. That doesn’t mean that those people should be okay with some random person driving their car through their front lawn at 60MPH.
Gworm tried to set a gotcha, but he didn’t understand what was being said. As borg pointed out, the issue isn’t whether or not one ‘likes’ birthright citizenship, it’s whether or not you support adherence to the Constitution.
Which is exactly why I pointed out that there are differing opinions.
Robert’s and ACB got it wrong.
And to get ahead of your next word game, yes, I know Trump appointed ACB,
You keep playing word games all you want. It’s the only thing you know.
Ok. Simplified. Are you going to house the pregnant person who broke into your house and, had a baby?
It’s a yes or, no question.
It’s a question that has nothing to do with the topic.
But for kicks and giggles, count me aligned with borg on it.
I’d say that Roberts and Barrett are probably the most correct, especially since they both crossed ‘party lines’ (yes, the SC is supposed to be nonpartisan officially but….) and understood that the Constitution wasn’t overly vague in its wording.
You made this statement earlier:
“There are as many constitutional scholars that interpret it one way as there is another.”
Where’s your source for that assertion? It’s been in effect for almost 160 years, surely if what you say is true then it would have been in many precedent rulings by now, wouldn’t it?
Look, none of us have to like the current wording of the amendment and its effects today. But when we support ignoring the Constitution on matters that we don’t ‘like’, it takes us further and further away from what we need to become.
So you are saying the SC ruling was unanimous? No dissenting opinion? Read what the others said. Listen to Mark Levin’s opinion. I know, you’ll say Levin is a Clown.
There are legal opinions both ways on the interpretation. Do you really think the founders would be ok with the birth tourism going on by countries that are our enemy?
And Roberts and ACB are liberal rhinos for the most part. Trump made a mistake nominating ACB
Also, in my original post I quoted Lumpy’s post where he was defending illegal immigration because coming here legally was too expensive and drawn out. He wasn’t concerned about the constitutionality.
My question to him was to find out how far he was willing to go to support birthright citizenship, as he seems to do.
Post a reply to: If you are born here you are ….