Should we end Birthright Citizenship

[Argus]

If you are born while your parents are visiting France you do not get French citizenship. If a French baby is born while his/her parents are visiting Canada, or even flying over it, they get the full rights of a Canadian citizen along with all the privileges, including health care, voting and residency rights. The only other developed country which gives citizenship based on birthplace is the US. All the others go by the citizenship of the parents. An unknown number of people, including Americans (just in case free health care is needed) and third world people from India and China, among others, take advantage of this by flying to Canada to have their baby, then flying home.

Since the forms filled out by hospitals don't have a place for the citizenship of the parents, we don't actually know how many do this. But there are estimated to be 26 'birthing houses' in Richmond alone, where foreign women come just before they're ready to give birth. The conservatives voted at their recent conference to consider ending this policy. The Liberals and NDP have attacked this as 'hate and division' on the part of the NDP leader, and were accused of wanting to 'strip away people's citizenship' by behind the scenes Liberal leader Gerald Butts.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/why-does-canada-automatically-give-citizenship-to-people-born-here

[Hates politicians]

Customs needs to send them packing before they are allowed in, same as the u.s does

[turningrite]

I would end birthright tourism, for sure. The issue is now being confused in the MSM with the refugee issue, noting how banning birthright citizenship could generate stateless citizens where children born here to refugee claimants are concerned. While this is a legitimate consideration to take into account, a law ending automatic birthright citizenship should focus on those, including tourists and temporary residents and visa holders, who have children here while not holding and not formally seeking status in Canada. It should be fairly easy to write such a law.

Edited August 28, 2018 by turningrite

[Shady]

Yes.   It circumvents the immigration process.

[Centerpiece]

Yes. It was ludicrous in the first place - and it's ludicrous to keep doing it. If the parents want the baby to be Canadian, they can immigrate to Canada and apply for citizenship for themselves and their child.

[-TSS-]

A child of a citizen should be a citizen, no matter what the background of the citizen is. Unfortunately, but you just can't get around that fact.

On the other hand, if a dog is born in a stable it is still a dog and not a horse. The same idea goes for citizenship.

Edited August 28, 2018 by -TSS-

[eyeball]

Earthlings should always be welcome anywhere they want on our planet. Martians OTOH can go to Jupiter.

[Goddess]

47 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Earthlings should always be welcome anywhere they want on our planet. Martians OTOH can go to Jupiter.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of crazy and violent earthlings, so your utopia (while a lovely thought) isn't very practical at this point in time.

[Argus]

The Left is already getting hysterical on the issue, even though it's nothing but a non-binding proposal.

The Conservative's Birthright Motion Should Terrify All Canadians.

This past weekend, a non-binding motion at the Conservative Party convention claiming that children born in Canada should not be given Canadian citizenship unless one of their parents is Canadian was passed. This should shake this nation to the core.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/the-conservatives-birthright-motion-should-terrify-all-canadians/ar-BBMyFfN?ocid=spartanntp

 

[taxme]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

If you are born while your parents are visiting France you do not get French citizenship. If a French baby is born while his/her parents are visiting Canada, or even flying over it, they get the full rights of a Canadian citizen along with all the privileges, including health care, voting and residency rights. The only other developed country which gives citizenship based on birthplace is the US. All the others go by the citizenship of the parents. An unknown number of people, including Americans (just in case free health care is needed) and third world people from India and China, among others, take advantage of this by flying to Canada to have their baby, then flying home.

Since the forms filled out by hospitals don't have a place for the citizenship of the parents, we don't actually know how many do this. But there are estimated to be 26 'birthing houses' in Richmond alone, where foreign women come just before they're ready to give birth. The conservatives voted at their recent conference to consider ending this policy. The Liberals and NDP have attacked this as 'hate and division' on the part of the NDP leader, and were accused of wanting to 'strip away people's citizenship' by behind the scenes Liberal leader Gerald Butts.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/why-does-canada-automatically-give-citizenship-to-people-born-here

I guess that this would explain as to why Asians are now the majority population in Richmond, BC. I wonder if this is happening in Surrey, BC also as the East Indian population will soon be in the majority in that city.       Liberal Butts can kiss my conservative born in Canada Canadian butt.   

[Machjo]

44 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Unfortunately, there are a lot of crazy and violent earthlings, so your utopia (while a lovely thought) isn't very practical at this point in time.

I agree. Think Russell Williams. He was an immigrant too by the way. We definitely need to keep Britons out of Canada.

Edited August 28, 2018 by Machjo

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

Unfortunately, there are a lot of crazy and violent earthlings, so your utopia (while a lovely thought) isn't very practical at this point in time.

A hell of a lot more practical than your dystopia.

[-1=e^ipi]

End the birthright monarchy as well.

[ironstone]

Yes,end this idiotic policy for good! As was mentioned in the first post,there are only two countries that have this policy in place and who knows how many people come to Canada only as an easy way to get citizenship for their child and all the benefits that come with it.

I won't hold my breath,even if the Conservatives win anytime soon .

[turningrite]

16 hours ago, ironstone said:

I won't hold my breath,even if the Conservatives win anytime soon .

It was a motion at a convention and has no binding impact on government policy should the CPC get elected. Harper, after all, didn't change policy on this even though he would no doubt have faced little public resistance had he chosen to do so. It's my impression that in this country the immigration lobby largely gets what it wants no matter which mainstream party is in power. Thus, the appeal of Bernier's proposal.

Edited August 29, 2018 by turningrite

[Shady]

22 hours ago, eyeball said:

Earthlings should always be welcome anywhere they want on our planet. Martians OTOH can go to Jupiter.

Unfortunately it's not as simple as that.  Social safety nets can buckle under a mass of new recipients, and wages can be suppressed under a mass of new labour.  So simplistic notions like that are irresponsible.

[turningrite]

1 hour ago, Truth Detector said:

Unfortunately it's not as simple as that.  Social safety nets can buckle under a mass of new recipients, and wages can be suppressed under a mass of new labour.  So simplistic notions like that are irresponsible.

You're stating truths that our immigration lobby and the political cartel in Ottawa as well as their media acolytes and partisans don't want to acknowledge. The only hope on the horizon for a sensible new policy approach is Bernier's proposed party.

[JamesHackerMP]

the U.S. has the same issue, if you drop a baby on U.S. soil it's American. It's written into the 14th Amendment, even though the purpose of writing it into the 14th Amendment had more to do with people whose ancestry was African, rather than illegal immigration. There's a lot of discussion about this currently.

[eyeball]

On 8/29/2018 at 10:11 AM, Truth Detector said:

Unfortunately it's not as simple as that.  Social safety nets can buckle under a mass of new recipients, and wages can be suppressed under a mass of new labour.  So simplistic notions like that are irresponsible.

You're darn right they can buckle.  You haven't seen anything yet.

Wait until Canada is faced with climate change refugees.  It'll be like a Zombie Apocalypse compared to the irregular migration.  Did you ignore the warnings of commies globalization critics along with environmentalists other commies too by any chance?  Did you forget they also warned how our dash to the bottom would morph into angst over immigrants followed by the rise of populist reactionary sentiments?  We can't say we haven't seen anything yet when it comes to that can we?

Oh well, I guess we'll need a pretty harsh ethos so blowing climate refugee boats out of the water comes more naturally.

[August1991]

On 8/28/2018 at 3:40 PM, Argus said:

The Left is already getting hysterical on the issue, even though it's nothing but a non-binding proposal.

...

Argus, citizenship matters - like membership, or condo fees.

Membership is binding. Who do we allow in to the club? 

Edited September 1, 2018 by August1991

[Argus]

7 hours ago, August1991 said:

Argus, citizenship matters - like membership, or condo fees.

Membership is binding. Who do we allow in to the club? 

And the Left wants us to allow anyone who walks in the door, invited or not, even if they break in.

[dialamah]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

And the Left wants us to allow anyone who walks in the door, invited or not, even if they break in.

And yet, they don't.   The "Right" does not consist of 65% of the electorate, which the poll you've referenced tells us is the percentage of Canadians who think the illegal border crossings need to be addressed.   That 65% includes a lot of 'left' leaning people.

Perhaps you could try to avoid grouping and accusing millions and billions of people in your 'arguments'.  

 

[-TSS-]

On 8/28/2018 at 9:38 PM, eyeball said:

Earthlings should always be welcome anywhere they want on our planet. Martians OTOH can go to Jupiter.

How about trying that logic entering China or Singapore? "This is our planet and I want to go anywhere I want". See what would happen.

[August1991]

On 9/1/2018 at 10:23 AM, Argus said:

And the Left wants us to allow anyone who walks in the door, invited or not, even if they break in.

On this question/issue, I agree with you and reckon that the North American MSM/sophisticated Euro people/radical left/Trudeau Jnr/Scheer are missing the point.

We are not in 1840 and Irish Catholics fleeing/seeking a better life. This is not 1890 and Italians/Jews/Central Europeans seeking a better life - risking/surviving.

In 2020, we in the West have created sophisticated welfare States where we collectively care for those who, by chance, cannot care for themselves.

We in the West are about 600 million. The world is about 7 billion. The US cannot offer Medicaid to everyone in the world. Quebec cannot give a carte soleil to everyone who is in Quebec. Our Western model/system does not work now at large.

Edited September 3, 2018 by August1991

[eyeball]

On 9/1/2018 at 12:12 PM, -TSS- said:

How about trying that logic entering China or Singapore? "This is our planet and I want to go anywhere I want". See what would happen.

And yet they and us are perfectly happy to let each other's money behave that way. AFAIC people should be able to go anywhere money can.

How about applying your logic to money?  It should get in line and make an application to enter and above all else it should also pass a 'values' test.  We really don't need anymore steenkin' money in Canada - we've already got more than enough putrescent wealth than is healthy.   That said, we should also be a lot more careful about allowing our filthy rich to go abroad and sully Canada's integrity any more than it already is.  The damage that ugly money can do is probably a lot worse than what happens when people are allowed to go off and join ISIS.