Immigration? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 02:43:11 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Immigration? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Immigration?  (Read 14052 times)
classical liberal
RightWingNut
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,758


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

« on: May 16, 2004, 02:36:44 PM »

Option 7.

We should eliminate the minimum wage entirely, not just for immigrants.  We should also have the open border, if they want to do the work and let me sit on my ass I have no problems with them.
Logged
classical liberal
RightWingNut
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,758


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2004, 08:51:18 PM »

For legal immigration I suggest that adult applicants be required to take and sucessfully complete a G.E.D. exam in American English as a requirement to be considered for legal immigration.

I would then suggest we take the top scorers (presuming no cheating) in a number not to exceed one per cent of the population of the United States per annum.  We should also consider running background checks to try to weed out terrorists.

For illegal immigration, build a wall.  Stop it cold.  

I think that we should have a provisional citizenship for native born citizens and then award full citizenship based on that same exam upon their majority.
Logged
classical liberal
RightWingNut
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,758


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2004, 09:06:58 PM »

You never know, enough stupid people vote for the GOP when their interests would be better served by the Dems.  A savy politician could probably get this measure through, although it could be greased by attaching it to the consitutional amendment that contains the repeal of amendment 16.
Logged
classical liberal
RightWingNut
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,758


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2004, 10:39:09 PM »

Shoot 'em on sight as they are crossing the border.

you mean illegals right?
Logged
classical liberal
RightWingNut
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,758


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2004, 11:46:26 PM »

Shoot 'em on sight as they are crossing the border.

you mean illegals right?

Certainly. Or legalize slavery for illegals. Either way it's a win win situation.

You know, technically slavery for illegals isn't against any law.  Amendment 14 Section 1 specifically says that the protections guarantied by the constitution are only guarantied to "all persons born or naturalized in the United States".  Amendment 13 is one such protection and since illegals are not "born or naturalized in the United States", they are not protected from "involuntary servitude".

Similarly, foeti are not yet "born or naturalized in the united states" and therefore are not guarantied "the rights to life, liberty and property".  Thus from a strict-constructionist viewpoint, abortion bans are unconstitutional as they extend rights not guarantied by the constitution, they are a power that was "not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States," and as such "are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".  The constitution requires the government to preotect the rights of those "born or naturalized" while the protection of all other persons is "reserved to the states".
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 12 queries.