How many of you have actually been in countries ie, South East Asia? The person that I was refering to is actually my neice by marriage. As for the term "anchor babies", This is actually a recently coined term. My neice was here on a Tourist Visa. So she was here legally. She only wanted the very best for her child, as any parent would. The US is portrayed as a country of unbeleivable opportunities, "a land of milk & honey". IF most of you good people out there could see the way many people live in other countries, you would understand that they are willing to use whatever means necessary to have a better life for their families. I see that I have hit "a nerve" with many out there. At times I agree with most of your views. We need to get down on our knees & thank God that we live in such a great country where we are free to express our views. God Bless all of you.
2007-05-17 07:12:16 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
yes, you are right. people in this country need to travel more and see the world. I don not think that everyone here knows how terrible the living conditions can be in other countries....nobody here has ever experienced something close to that.
2007-05-17 07:16:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
I lived in S E Asia for 3 years and will return there when I retire. Purely because I can live there extremely well on Soc Sec only. I have also been to Africa, Brazil and many other places where people live in depressing conditions. Our standard of living is great but so are many other nations in Europe and other parts of the world. Unfortunately many are also MUCH worse.
Don't know what your question was about citizenship of babies born in U.S. but they are American Citizens. That does not automatically provide their parents the ability to stay. At a later point in life the child can petition the parents and get them permanent immigant status.
The baby can leave with the parents and return at any time in the future as a U.S. citizen.
2007-05-17 07:19:33 · answer #2 · answered by Moondog 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I didn't see your first question, but I guessing it has to do with immigration reform or pro-amnesty (based on the tone of this question). If that is the case...the only problem with the current immigration laws is that they are not enforced, they do not need to be overhauled, only enforced. The loophole allowing "anchor babies" needs to be closed to prevent people from exploiting their children to attempt to bypass immigration procedures or justify amnesty. I understand the conditions in many of these countries are deplorable, but the "use whatever means necessary to have a better life for their families" argument is the same one most thieves and many other criminals use to justify their crimes, especially if they perceive (be it true or not) their victims are better off or have more than they do. They still need to go through the process legally...it is more than worth it in the long run and will not jeopardize their future here as being illegal can...they don't need to do "use WHATEVER means necessary" but use the CORRECT and LEGAL means available.
2007-05-17 07:40:29 · answer #3 · answered by Starshine 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The idea of an 'Anchor Baby' is new, because the trick of using a child born in America as a pretext to stay in America seems to have caught on lately.
I absolutely feel that children born in America should be American citizens, the 14th Amendment gaurantees it. If a parent wants to make so great a sacrifice as to leave thier child here to be raised as an American when they are deported, I wouldn't want to stop them. Nor would I demand that sacrifice of them: they should be free to take thier child home, regardless of technicallities of citizenship. But, in no way should the existence of such a child bear upon the legal status of the parent.
2007-05-17 07:24:31 · answer #4 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am greatful everyday that I am an American, and I understand what it is to chase the American dream - my great-grandparents came here from nothing, where they had been hiding in fear on the eve of WWI. I am not against immigration.... only illegal immigration. I feel that we should continue to welcome people from around the world, and give them the chances we have had. But, it needs to be done in a methodical, legal way to ensure that our nation stays great. Our laws protect the rights of the legal immigrant as well as the citizens, and the nation as a whole. The laws aren't there to be mean. They are there to help our country to grow in a way that is systematic, comfortable, stable, and safe for everyone. The greatness of the US must be protected for future generations of citizens and legal immigrants, otherwise there will be nothing here for them.
2007-05-17 07:24:09 · answer #5 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I understand why they want to come. However, more than 4 billion people are too poor to get and fly here on tourist visas, and we simply can't take them all. I have nothing against your neice. Her parents LEGALLY took advantage of a loophole.
I just think that it is necessary that immigration to this country be decided by this country, not by the people who want to come here. I think the loophole needs to be closed.
2007-05-17 07:20:27 · answer #6 · answered by DAR 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Thats wonderful for your neice.
Sadly because of people like her, I was unable to attain a B2 visa to visit my parents several years ago. They point blank denied me, with the explanation of "we rarely give B2's out to young people as there is too much risk of them not returning".
As it happened, I wound up marrying an American (who happens to be from one of these "countries" you mention). He came here legally on a work visa, waited 8 years to become a citizen and then applied for me to come over (note, I had to wait for him to become a citizen before he could even apply).
My visa took nearly 2 years, and cost upwards of $10,000 in total once factoring in lawyers, travel, paperwork, etc.
Oh well, at the end of the day, at least we can hold our heads up high and say we did it the legal way. I'm not so sure your neice can.
2007-05-17 07:26:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Why do people think that the US and its people are single handed responsible for taking care of the world?
I sympathize with people from other countries and I back that up with regular contributions to charities. The US is wide open to those who legally obtain citizenship, but why do we have to sit back and support everyone and when we complain that the taxpayers are over burdened we suddenly become the big baddies on the block trying to horde all the "milk and honey"?
Most of America is sympathetic to other countries but who is feeling sorry for the over burdened tax payer?
2007-05-17 07:25:08 · answer #8 · answered by Rabid Frog 4 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Me and my gf entered the Green Card lottery this year, we hope to win!
2007-05-17 07:15:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I did not "attempt" to answer you first question, but I did answer this one. Hooray.
2007-05-17 07:16:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋