Birthright Citizenship

HERE ARE ALL THE DEVELOPED NATIONS OF THE WORLD
THAT OFFER BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP TO THE BABIES
OF TOURISTS AND ILLEGAL ALIENS:

• United States

That's right, every other modern Developed nation in the world has gotten rid of birthright citizenship policies.

Yet, most of U.S. news media and politicians the last two weeks have ridiculed the comments by some other politicians that it is time for the U.S. to put an end to birthright citizenship for tourists and illegal aliens.

Folks, the U.S. stands alone.

ACTION: Send faxes to your Members of Congress and urge them to immediately sponsor legislation to change the law that currently grants birthright citizenship.

Find the faxes to send on your customized Action Buffet by clicking here.

There used to be all kinds of Developed countries that gave away their citizenship as freely as we do in the U.S. But one by one they all have recognized the folly of that policy.

SOME MODERN COUNTRIES THAT RECENTLY
ENDED THEIR BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP POLICY

• Canada was the last non-U.S. holdout. Illegal aliens stopped getting citizenship for their babies in 2009.
  
  
• Australia's birthright citizenship requirements are much more stringent than those of H.R. 1868 and took effect in 2007.
  
  
• New Zealand repealed in 2006
  
  
• Ireland repealed in 2005
  
  
• France repealed in 1993
  
  
• India repealed in 1987
  
  
• United Kingdom repealed in 1983
  
  
• Portugal repealed in 1981

The United States is the laughing stock of the modern world. Only the U.S. values its citizenship so lowly as to distribute it promiscuously to the off-spring of foreign citizens visiting Disney World on tourist visas and to foreign citizens who have violated their promises on their visitor, work and student visas to stay illegally in the country, as well as to those who sneak across our borders.

Click on my blog to join the discussion about this.

Notice we are asking to change the "law" and not the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

H.R. 1868 by Rep. Gary Miller of California would merely change the federal law (passed by Congress) that currently requires giving U.S. citizenship to these babies.

We and many Constitutional scholars do not believe a Constitutional Amendment is required. But we also know that as soon as H.R. 1868 is passed there will be suits taking it to the Supreme Court. We believe the Supremes are likely to agree with us that H.R. 1868 does not violate any part of the Constitution.

Go to our "5 Great Immigration-Reduction Bills" page to see all the Members of Congress who are attempting to move the U.S. into the 21st century by co-sponsoring H.R. 1868.

THANKS,