![]() |
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
|
| | Thread Tools |
| | #1 (permalink) (top) |
| Volcanic Erupter Location: Hong Kong (for now) Posts: 7,002 | Who Can Be President Of The United States Of America? Practically anyone born in the USA. But if you're not born in the USA, you can't. Now does that accord with the principle of equality (or for the principle of merit for that matter)? Does it even accord with common sense? So do you think that the Constitution ought to be amended so that US citizens who were not born here can make a bid for President? Last edited by tinybear; Jan 17, 2005 at 01:54 pm. |
| | |
| | #2 (permalink) (top) |
![]() Illogic Hunter Location: Seattle Posts: 2,385 | Good question. Do any of our constitutional scholars here know why this requirement exists in the first place, and if that reasoning is still relevant in the modern world? "A republic, if you can keep it." -- Benjamin Franklin Free State Project freestateproject.org |
| | |
| | #4 (permalink) (top) |
![]() Illogic Hunter Location: Seattle Posts: 2,385 | I can't see any obvious reason. I'm all for open immigration and equal protection, as you know. So unless someone brings up a good point, something better than "we can't trust foreigners", I would support an amendment. "A republic, if you can keep it." -- Benjamin Franklin Free State Project freestateproject.org |
| | |
| | #6 (permalink) (top) |
| Pragmatic liberal Posts: 421 | I don't consider myself a constitutional scholar, but I can think of a good reason for the requirement. The people who drafted the constitution must have feared that a foreign country that wanted to influence policies of the American government to their favor might send people over to gain citizenship and then run for president. The only way to ensure that it could never happen was to forbid anyone who was born as a citizen of another country from ever running for president. |
| | |
| | #7 (permalink) (top) |
![]() Illogic Hunter Location: Seattle Posts: 2,385 | That's kind of ridiculous, though. There are now large groups of people *inside* the US whos goals are so foreign to my own that I don't trust them at all. Special interests are now a large part of American Politics. Keeping someone out just because they were born in another country seems naive and quant. "A republic, if you can keep it." -- Benjamin Franklin Free State Project freestateproject.org |
| | |
| | #12 (permalink) (top) |
![]() Illogic Hunter Location: Seattle Posts: 2,385 | But those guys would lose, hands down. I'm saying that someone simply being from another country doesn't make them more untrustworthy in a sea of corrupt politicians. Not to mention that our native-born politicians are influenced by foreign interests anyway. "A republic, if you can keep it." -- Benjamin Franklin Free State Project freestateproject.org |
| | |
| | #14 (permalink) (top) | |
| Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,746 | Quote:
All too often we elect people who say one thing and do another once they have been elected. The possibility exists that the framers of the Constitution considered that and realized it is damn near impossible to guard against it with a document, but may have figured that eliminating a foreign-born president would at least reduce the chance an anti-american charmer wouldn't get that power. The whole thing is about Schwarzenegger and how the conservatives would like to see him run, LONG BEFORE he even had the chance to even prove himself as governor! Lets see, Popular actor with ZERO political or leadership experience. Calls himself a conservative so the conservatives gush about how he should be allowed to run for president yet not knowing a THING about his ability or fitness for the office at the time. Maybe I'm the only one with a problem with this but I can see that as a good reason to have the restriction right there! | |
| | |
| | #15 (permalink) (top) |
| Volcanic Erupter Location: Hong Kong (for now) Posts: 7,002 | What's the difference between him and Reagan, except Ronnie is your homegrown all-American cowboy hero whilst Arnold's just an alien Terminator from Austria who has yet to learn how to pronounce "Kalifawneeia". |
| | |
| | #16 (permalink) (top) | ||
![]() Fire the Liars Location: California Posts: 7,090 | Quote:
I agree with Scribbler; Quote:
Unless you want to ammend it to keep us safe from this: ![]() America doesnt demand someone better than Bush? There are billions of more qualified men right here in the USA, why should we outsource the top job? You dont have much faith in our gene pool if you think we need to look elsewhere. And WTF, is with the popularity of Nazis again? | ||
| | |
| | #17 (permalink) (top) | |
| Skeptical Patriot Posts: 7,746 | Quote:
You know, for a party that claims to love this country so much, the Republicans seem to want to change a whole LOT of the document that the country is based on. Between now and the end of Bush's term while the GOP runs the show I figure we are going to see still MORE changes and new amendments to the Constitution being proposed, and I'm fearful some may just be adopted. | |
| | |
| | #19 (permalink) (top) | |
![]() Fire the Liars Location: California Posts: 7,090 | Its normal to feel loyalty to ones native land. If it were not important they wouldnt have written Article 2, Section 5 in the Constitution. Check out this exerpt: Quote:
This is purely an ego/power trip, he has already shown himself willing to lie to advance himself. Last edited by gr8fuldaniel; Jan 18, 2005 at 04:50 am. | |
| | |
| | #20 (permalink) (top) |
| Volcanic Erupter Location: Hong Kong (for now) Posts: 7,002 | What is one's native land though? If say you're born in England, but cam to America when you were just 4 and have lived, worked, married and raised your kids in America ever since, who would you be loyal to? Hey, too bad Bob Hope's dead. Otherwise you could ask him. |
| | |