Here's the skinny. Authorities in San Gabriel, California, shut down a home because of code violations. According to inspectors, the house was literally falling down in areas, and was unsafe to live in. But that isn't the main part of the story. The REAL story lies in what they found at the house when they arrived to shut it down.
Ever heard of "maternity tourists?" It isn't a new phenomena. Simply put, it's when pregnant women from nations such as China, Taiwan, and really any third-world country get a tourist visa and visit the US to have bouncing baby US citizens. It's been happening forever, it seems, but now there's a twist.
The house that was shut down in San Gabriel was FULL of pregnant women from China and Taiwan... not to mention newborn babies. Each woman had paid thousands of dollars to come live in this house, have their baby in a US hospital, and then recover in the house. The new part of this is the organized, profit-centered aspect.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42252780/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts
Now here's the rub: nothing about this operation is illegal. At all.
So, here's the discussion I want to open. Should organized "maternity tourism" operations be legal? Should pregnant women who give birth while in the US on a tourist Visa, who come here specifically to do that, be rewarded with a tiny US citizen?
Keep in mind, we're not talking (right now) about whether or not illegal immigrants who are LIVING in this country and give birth should have US birthright citizenship endowed upon their children. No, we're just dealing with tourists who come here for that purpose.
Should it be legal?
Friday, March 25, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
the alternative is what, abortion by judicial decree? Or we we let her give birth while in handcuffs and then deport both?
ReplyDeleteThe case law on the point goes back to the 1880's or so, a child born in the US is a US citizen and don't think tinkering the with 14th Amendment is wise. That seems to lead to some one waiting to see my papers because I look Canadian, eh?
Though the devious part of me wonders if this isn't a front for human trafficking. Five years service in a massage parlor for a ticket?
Who said anything about abortion? The question is one of citizenship, not life.
ReplyDeleteAnd it COULD be changed pretty easily, without much in the way of danger. For example, require either 1 parent who is a citizen (not necessarily natural born) OR require a minumum residency requirement... if you haven't been living here a year before giving birth (for instance) then no deal. That way folks who just swing in and give birth don't qualify.
The question isn't CAN it be done safely, but SHOULD it be done.
Gotta keep those little whelps from becoming burdens to the state, some would say. After all, they could pop out at any time and become citizens unless we machine gun them at the border fence, etc, ad nauseam.
ReplyDeleteShould be done, means ignoring the plain language of the amendment or changing it. Don't see where the problem justifies a change in our basic law and we don't want to go where we ignore our constitution.
Let me bring up a point, here.
ReplyDeleteThe PURPOSE of the "natural-born citizenship requirement is so that our President is always born and raised in this country. That way, they are part of our culture.
With maternity tourism, these "natural born citizens" are raised in their own country, in their own culture. If they ever return in the future, they have the legal right to run for President, even though they are of another culture entirely and have those values. In the case of children from China, those values would be socialism and a pretty totalitarian government.
I think it's clear that this kind of thing wasn't envisioned by the founders. It was envisioned that birthright citizenship would allow the children to live and grow up here and actually be a part of our country.
The danger in allowing those brought up under a communist regime to serve as President should be obvious to everyone. We're already seeing massive overreaches of executive power, and this from a man who was raised here, at least in his later years, and merely believes in vision of total government control.
It's not a good thing. It is, in fact, an abuse of the privilege, so to speak.
It looks like you need to think and study a little more, Bassel.
ReplyDeleteThe presidential candidacy issue is very important considering the ease of international tourism. From my observation, the US is the ONLY country that allows for non-citizens to register their US born children as natural born. That made perfect sense in the US when we were a nation of immigrants. My grandparents and great-grands came from Europe and all expected to live and die as Americans. Why should their children not have been Americans? In every other country the citizenship of the child is dependent on the parent, not the place of birth.
"Maternity tourism" is either a way to get out of an oppressive political or economic situation or at least get your child out of it. If they are going to so much trouble for the benefit of their offspring, I admire them, but it is a serious circumvention of the intention of the immigration law.