A man or woman can only be truly LOYAL to one country.
Having dual, triple, or even more citizenships gives rise to conflicts of interests when "push comes to shove".
I contend that "citizenships of convenience" should be abloished.
What do you folks think?
2006-09-26 14:17:09 · 10 answers · asked by Gotta Know 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
To highlight my point. Suppose you have, let us say, both Iranian and American citizenship.
Citizenship not only confers rights it also imposes obligations on the individual.
If these countries decide to declare WAR on each other, how do you decide for whom to fight?
2006-09-26 14:36:41 · update #1
To Ash: -- Is your loyalty and those of your children in the final analysis to America or to the other countries to which you are citizens?
"Fence sitting" and then choosing what country is most convenient politically at any particular time is the core reason for me asking my original question.
2006-09-26 16:17:53 · update #2
To AdventSatanist:
If you dispise your British citizenship so much, why don't you give it up?
Correct me if I am wrong, but I suspect you are keeping it because it may be convenient in certain circumstances for you to have it.
2006-09-27 01:06:17 · update #3
If one is born in a certain country, but one immigrates to another, one should be allowed to have dual citizenship until one is an adult, so one could visit friends or family in one's birth-country, for example. It would be meerly a conevience, but as a minor, one could not easily abuse a dual citizenship.
But I agree that, as an adult, one could easily abuse a dual citizenship.
2006-09-26 14:30:02 · answer #1 · answered by ww1086 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I have dual citizenship my spouse and children have 3. Their and my alligience is to this country we call home. But we are a family that travels has property in other countries, I am not 'native american' I have my own 'green' nationality for which many generations of my ancestors suffered because offand it is precious to me. Its not a convenience. Its a fact of being a citizen in the 21st century. They are very few of us who are born, live, marry our kin and die in the same Place....Reminds me of Walton's Mountain!!
The US is not at war with every country!!! Not everyone has a conflict of interest. ...
Timothy McVeigh and his friend Terry Nichols, didn't have dual citizenship did they? Montana and the other 49 states.
2006-09-26 22:56:17 · answer #2 · answered by Ash 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If a couple marries and they are from different countries, they should be allowed dual citizenship and so should their children. It only makes sense since they have family/lives in both countries.
2006-09-26 21:45:18 · answer #3 · answered by Carol R 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Citizenship doesn't have to do with loyalty, jeez, I have dual citizenship and I despise my other half (that being the British half). I'm loyal to America in my heart, and no document can change that, no matter what anybody says or does to try.
2006-09-26 21:37:21 · answer #4 · answered by High-strung Guitarist 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, I think you should not have dual or triple citizenship...at least not if one of them is American.
2006-09-27 01:33:26 · answer #5 · answered by DAR 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think you're supposed to choose which country when you turn 18...that's usually a thing for kids, I think...
2006-09-26 22:07:17 · answer #6 · answered by gokart121 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
good question. where does there loyalty lie. but not really sure how to answer this question
2006-09-26 21:31:55 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree...."a man can not serve 2 masters..."
2006-09-26 21:57:50 · answer #8 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely NOT!!!
2006-09-26 21:19:13 · answer #9 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
obsolutely not.No nada.
2006-09-26 21:19:17 · answer #10 · answered by sunshine 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋