Being born in a country = citizenship?

[Jaymes]

Is it right that being born in a country automatically (with some exceptions) confers citizenship? I'm not just speaking of the children of illegal immigrants, but anyone who is born in a country.

I'm not sure about other countries, but I know that the US requires immigrants to pass a citizenship test that tests them on their knowledge of the country's past and a few other things.

Yet in my 9th grade history class we took that and a third of the class didn't pass... all of the students in said class were people who have lived in the US since they were born.

Why shouldn't they be deported if being able to pass a citizenship test is such an important requirement for being a US citizen?

 

[Scuba Pete]

I was born in Columbia and will forever be considered Columbian by that government, though the US government considers me to be a US citizen.

 

[Zephyr]

I think just being born in the country isn't enough. If the parents (or at least one) are required to be citizens then that would eliminate the whole "anchor baby" problem.

And to Scuba Pete, that's nothing. My girlfriend's dad somehow found himself to be a citizen of 4 different countries at once (The Netherlands, Indonesia, South Africa, and America) :biglaugh:

 

[Jaymes]

As I said, I'm not just talking about illegal immigrants. I'm talking about everybody. If this citizenship is so vital and important, why shouldn't the third of my class that failed it have been deported?

 

[Zephyr]

As I said, I'm not just talking about illegal immigrants. I'm talking about everybody. If this citizenship is so vital and important, why shouldn't the third of my class that failed it have been deported?

Because they were born in the states to (likely) other American citizens.

 

[Jaymes]

So? What if the parents are also citizens of other countries? Should their children automatically be citizens of that country, too, even if they've never been there?

I'm mostly fixated on the citizenship test. The government apparently thinks this is vitally important to pass to be able to become a citizen. If you fail it, you aren't a citizen... unless you were born to parents that are citizens, who were born to parents that were citizens, and so on and so forth. I would be surprised if even a large minority of the US's ancestors took any kind of citizenship test. I'd also be surprised if most people in the US could pass it.

 

[Zephyr]

So? What if the parents are also citizens of other countries? Should their children automatically be citizens of that country, too, even if they've never been there?

That should be up to those other countries. If I were the dictator of a country, I would make it far more restrictive. Denmark for the Danes, Germany for the Germans, etc., but that wouldn't work in America because we are a nation of immigrants.

I'm mostly fixated on the citizenship test. The government apparently thinks this is vitally important to pass to be able to become a citizen. If you fail it, you aren't a citizen... unless you were born to parents that are citizens, who were born to parents that were citizens, and so on and so forth. I would be surprised if even a large minority of the US's ancestors took any kind of citizenship test. I'd also be surprised if most people in the US could pass it.

Honestly, I'd be a bit suprised too. I only just barely passed it. The only use I see for the test is that it will thin out the herd a little, letting fewer foreigners into America. This ensures that the only people who get in are the ones who know the history of this nation.

 

[Jaymes]

Why is that vital or even important in terms of who belongs in a country? I'd wager 99% of the people that immigrate somewhere don't immigrate to be historians.

And for the record, most of the questions they put on there aren't that hard... if you've grown up in a nation and gone through its (however crappy) school system and had some inkling of the history drilled into you.

 

[Ciscokid]

Is it right that being born in a country automatically (with some exceptions) confers citizenship? I'm not just speaking of the children of illegal immigrants, but anyone who is born in a country.

I'm not sure about other countries, but I know that the US requires immigrants to pass a citizenship test that tests them on their knowledge of the country's past and a few other things.

Yet in my 9th grade history class we took that and a third of the class didn't pass... all of the students in said class were people who have lived in the US since they were born.

Why shouldn't they be deported if being able to pass a citizenship test is such an important requirement for being a US citizen?

I don't think that just being born in a country constitutes being a citizen. I think there are those that use the "system" to parasitically gain citizenship. I think the parent(s) need to be citizens as well. There may be come exceptions to the rule but I'm not sure what they'd be.

 

[Jaymes]

How many times do I need to reiterate that I'm not just talking about illegal immigrants and their children?

 

[McBell]

As I said, I'm not just talking about illegal immigrants. I'm talking about everybody. If this citizenship is so vital and important, why shouldn't the third of my class that failed it have been deported?

Deported to where?

 

[Jaymes]

Deported to where?

How about Guantanamo?

 

[Quiddity]

Is it right that being born in a country automatically (with some exceptions) confers citizenship? I'm not just speaking of the children of illegal immigrants, but anyone who is born in a country.

I'm not sure about other countries, but I know that the US requires immigrants to pass a citizenship test that tests them on their knowledge of the country's past and a few other things.

Yet in my 9th grade history class we took that and a third of the class didn't pass... all of the students in said class were people who have lived in the US since they were born.

Why shouldn't they be deported if being able to pass a citizenship test is such an important requirement for being a US citizen?

That's a lot of people to deport. Not just illegal immigrants either. In fact, some illegal immigrants could possibly test better then some European 3rd generation kid from Minnesotta.

 

[McBell]

How about Guantanamo?

Seems you have given less than 'Not Much' thought on this idea...

 

[Quiddity]

How about Guantanamo?

Too small. How about Hawaii?

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Jaymes,

Is it right that being born in a country automatically (with some exceptions) confers citizenship? I'm not just speaking of the children of illegal immigrants, but anyone who is born in a country.

I think we ought to think of the opposite of this before we declare that it doesn't make much sense.

The opposite would be being born into a country, but you are not a citizen of that country. And presumably if you are not a citizen of that country you don't have to obey its laws.

So, I think the concept that if you are born into a country and that makes you a citizen of that country makes sense when we think of what would happen if this were not the case.

 

[Jaymes]

Seems you have given less than 'Not Much' thought on this idea...

I'm not suggesting that they should be deported. I'm asking why they shouldn't if passing the citizenship test is such a vitally important part of being a citizen.

The opposite would be being born into a country, but you are not a citizen of that country. And presumably if you are not a citizen of that country you don't have to obey its laws.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Unless those crazy foreign tourists get away with a lot of lawbreaking that I'm not aware of.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Jaymes,

That makes no sense whatsoever. Unless those crazy foreign tourists get away with a lot of lawbreaking that I'm not aware of.

The tourist analogy doesn't work because people would be born in a country and live there (for a considerable amount of time).

So, the next question is; do those people have to obey the laws?

If they are not citizens, then why would they have too?

And if they don't, wouldn't that lead to anarchy?

 

[Jaymes]

The tourist analogy doesn't work because people would be born in a country and live there (for a considerable amount of time).

It works in the sense that they are not citizens and in a country. And, strangely, tourists (noncitizens in a country) have to obey the laws even though they're not citizens.

So, the next question is; do those people have to obey the laws?

Well I figured it'd be a good idea to just let them run around all lawless...

Why is this even being asked?

If they are not citizens, then why would they have too?

Why do tourists not run around and rape and commit robbery and do whatever they want? After all, they're not citizens.

And if they don't, wouldn't that lead to anarchy?

No, it would lead to people being arrested. Good lord.

 

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Jaymes,

It works in the sense that they are not citizens and in a country. And, strangely, tourists (noncitizens in a country) have to obey the laws even though they're not citizens.

It actually doesn't work:

1. A toursit visiting a country.

2. A person being born in a country and living in that country.

(1) and (2) are very different. And it makes sense that in case (2) those people would be citizens of that country that they were born in.