The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Birthright citizenship should be abolished in the United States

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 734 times Debate No: 54271
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Thank you for visiting and/or accepting this debate.

People's right to have a son or daughter be a citizen of the US upon birth by default is a good thing in any situation. To have families from outside America move here for a better life opportunity is also beneficial because they will work hard, and their children should also have the chance for a good future.

Immigrants' children will grow up in the US in an environment wherein they can get used to the United States and essentially become Americans. To deny an American their citizenship is improper. Born and raised in America means American; they will learn English and the rules of the society as natural Americans will, and therefore deserve the right to be permanent citizens for their safety and future.

I would like to see an opening statement or some kind of introduction to my opposition's points and arguments as the first round.


I VOLUNTEER AS TRIBUTE... now seriously are tomatoes fruits or veges now more seriously Under the current interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, all persons born in the country and "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" (the "Citizenship Clause") are U.S. citizens. The amendment was enacted just after the Civil War for the purpose of enfranchising former slaves. However, Congress did not word the amendment in those terms. Rather, as with prior amendments, it expressed itself in broad, grandiose terms. Think of the First Amendment ("Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech or of the press"). What is "speech"? Are political action committees covered? We leave it to the courts to decide. The Constitution does not contain definitions. And likewise, the meaning of the Citizenship Clause eludes us. Are the children of immigrants citizens? But in this age of mass immigration, it should not.
Debate Round No. 1


In the United States, we have this idea that some immigrants diminish the quality of out country or economy. But, people work a lot harder than they used to, especially when there's pressure and these people want to prove that they're worthy of America.

The Irish immigrants (caused by the potato famine) in the 1800s increased the population of the North before the civil war. As a result, we saw a huge number of these people joining the army to fight for the north as Americans that wanted to work and risk their lives to be people that we honour. Obviously, the Union won, and the Irish contribution was priceless. Additionally, after the 1850s and 1840s, there were huge amounts of Chinese immigrants to the West (until the ban in the 1880s). They worked hard almost as slaves to get by and to have families that are American heroes and some were abused in unjust ways, but they took it for their families futures. Look at these people now. Some Chinese are still here as respected and successful people. The same applies to all the past immigrants. Now we have an idea of a "melting pot" in the US that represents the immigrants that we let in and became citizens after that amendment from the Reconstruction. This is what America is for.

What harm is done by letting in citizens that want opportunities for better lives? Some say that it takes away people's jobs. However, the people that immigrate can't even get very good jobs, so if they do somehow do that, they won't be attacking the white-collar jobs, and people with blue-collar jobs can get another without excessive strain or difficulty. Besides, we consider them Americans, and overtime, if their children are citizens, we will have a bigger and more powerful nation of people that were born and raised in America and love their country.

So, to address what your rhetorical questions pointed to in your first argument, we should have the amendment viewed as a way to let in people to our country freely because of the universal benefits; "mass immigration" is not necessarily a bad thing (right now).


YOU... my friend... are really REALLY boring comon, at least make this fun..... okay going back to the boring argument studies show that illegal aliens give birth to nearly 10 percent of babies born in United States... that's 30 million if the population in america is rounded to 300 million. Besides Canada, no other developed nation grants automatic citizenship to children born in that country, regardless of the citizenship status of its parents, other than the U.S. No European nations grant birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens.

Not coincidentally the majority of nations which do grant birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens are located in Central and South America, including Mexico: Mexico being the nation with the most illegal aliens in America and the most children born on U.S. soil to illegal aliens.

The pejorative moniker placed on these children is "anchor babies" because they anchor the illegal parents to their birthright legitimized children. Each year thousands of pregnant illegal immigrants cross the border into America for the express purpose of having a child born on U.S. soil, to take advantage of this loophole in the Constitution's Fourteenth amendment, put that in your book Mr. boring.
Debate Round No. 2


I'm going to choose to be as professional and civil as possible and refrain from ad hominem. Go ahead and do it yourself, but expect your rating to diminish.

The one important thing is that you failed to address my actual point. All I have heard you say is that there are a lot of illegal aliens in the US and they take advantage of the system. I explained how the immigrants benefit our society, but you stand rigid in asserting that is false and you as a result go on to explain how there are 30 million illegals born here. (By the way, that seems quite excessive; I would like to see a source for that.) Of course our immigrant population is very high, though. You didn't have a problem with it before the Fourteenth Amendment.

By the way, who is immigrating to Mexico for citizenship? You said "the majority of nations which do grant birthright citizenship to the children of illegal aliens are located in Central and South America, including Mexico."

Also, your first paragraph was just an appeal to popularity. I would like yo see you address the fact that immigration is good; explain why it's not a problem, and explain it in ways that I didn't already refute in my previous response. This is unfortunately the last round.


i dont really care about rating this site for me is just for fun so i can gain experience for my debate club, and i protest that i am uncivilized its not like im going flat out crazy on you my friend lol. and about ad hominem... its a debate website... so thats kind of required lol ;)

also i never said anyone was immigrating to mexico i just said they allow that there... and its not like people in mexico are ONLY Mexicans or of a Hispanic origin... theres also Caucasians and Asians... now are there a lot that it would be noticed... no... but you talking like only Hispanics are there...

also it was this website that i got that 30mill from - check it out for yourself if you dont believe me

and you asked me to addres why its illegal immagration is good... well here
Unauthorized immigration is a bellwether of the strength of the economy. Unlike legal immigrants who may have waited years or even decades for a visa, illegal immigrants respond quickly to changes in economic conditions. Inflows rise faster when the economy, especially the construction sector, is growing, and slow down when the economy is shrinking. This turnaround is consistent with other signs that the economy is recovering and that residential construction activity in particular is gaining steam"good news for homeowners.

The possible increase in the unauthorized population is also good news in that it may finally spur the House to pass immigration reform. But it"s critical that the House not use these numbers as a justification for even tougher border security. Economic forces, not border enforcement, drive illegal inflows. The Great Recession played a far bigger role in reducing unauthorized immigration than the tenfold increase in the Border Patrol"s budget over the last decade. The House Homeland Security Committee had the right idea to support a bill that removes last-minute additions to the Senate bill that double the number of Border Patrol agents along the U.S.-Mexico border and expand the fence.

Instead, the House should focus on addressing the fundamental factor that motivates most illegal immigration: jobs. Employers turn to undocumented immigrants because current immigration policy makes it impossible to bring in foreign workers quickly and legally when employers can"t find Americans to fill jobs. The current H-2A and H-2B temporary foreign worker programs require planning months in advance and following complicated rules. It"s far easier to hire an unauthorized immigrant.

Unauthorized immigrants have become a safety valve for the U.S. economy: they enter in greater numbers when needed, and they go where the jobs are. Their arrival in greater numbers is good news indeed. But sensible immigration reform that reduces the supply of and demand for unauthorized immigrants and admits more highly skilled immigrants would be even better news.
-( so you dont complain were i get my sources from
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by ANONYMOUS2282 2 years ago
okay im gonna accept ur challenge
Posted by ANONYMOUS2282 2 years ago
i like it... i however agree with u 100%... i might challenge you just for the fun of it just bs the whole thing but first let me get some info for an argument to go on and not make it boring
Posted by CoolPeppers12 2 years ago
I really don't get your debate. You say birthright citizenship should be abolished but in your description you say it's good to have?

I bet I'll never get a response, but if I do, that's great.
No votes have been placed for this debate.