How do I counter this VOTER'S Doubts About Ron Paul?????

[gb13]

This is an email I got from my cousin's husband about Ron Paul. He saw a bulletin I posted on MySpace, and responded with:


There's alot about him I like, actually but -

He also has spoken extensively to "neo confederate" groups, who believe in seccession.

And I'm greatly concerned with his articulation of revising the 14th Amendment, and removing birthright as an automatic bestowement iof citizenship.

I'm not too well versed in these two topics.

Help me with some Counter-arguments!

[Mort]

This is an email I got from my cousin's husband about Ron Paul. He saw a bulletin I posted on MySpace, and responded with:



I'm not too well versed in these two topics.

Help me with some Counter-arguments!

He also has spoken extensively to "neo confederate" groups, who believe in seccession.

And I'm greatly concerned with his articulation of revising the 14th Amendment, and removing birthright as an automatic bestowement iof citizenship.

Its freedom of speech. why can't he talk to them? Those groups obviously have not got anywhere. That shouldn't be a priority.

Humble foreign policy and small government are what we are going for here.

Ron Paul is only against anchor babies as far as I know. Mexican who cross the border and have their baby in the US. Those babies automatically become citizens.

That's my shot. If anyone else wants to try go ahead.

[chilledfresh]

First of all, some people view secession as a dirty word, but it is a completely legal concept supported by our Founding Fathers themselves. If a state feels that the United States government no longer represents their views, they have the right to secede from the Union.

As for the 14th Amendment, it is currently being used to give the children of illegal aliens birthright citizenship. The parents of these children then use reunification laws to become citizens themselves, running completely around the process of citizenship that all other immigrants are required to go through. This is completely unfair for those who enter our borders legally.

[runderwo]

A Constitutional Amendment can only be carried out with overwhelming popular and Congressional support.

On secession you'd have to know exactly what he objects to. Quite possibly it's the bloody civil war waged by the North that he associates with "Secession". But you should remind him that the Constitution is a voluntary pact between the states, and that NH retains the right of revolution in its state constitution.

[Constitution Supporter]

Not sure if this is correct, but I think one reason he wants to end birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants is to have less incentive for illegals to come to the USA.

[bc2208]

The target would be eliminating birthright citizenship for children when neither parent is a citizen.

[WilliamC]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.html

Amendment XIV

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Illegal aliens are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States since they are not in the country legally. Therefore their children do no get automatic citizenship.

[NoMoreApathy]

Well, just tell him how incredibly spun that article about neo-confederates was to begin with. This guilt by association thing needs to stop.

Seccession is synonymous with racism, because when we were kids we were taught that the Civil War was about evil racists that wanted to secede from the union so they could keep slaves legally. Just teach him how incredibly spun that whole history lesson was back in school, and instead school him on the fact that the REAL reason for the war was because of a fight against central banking.

As far as birthright citizenship goes, make sure he's at least anti-illegal immigration first. If he is, then explain to him how ending birthright citizenship would be a huge step towards deterring the whole influx of illegals to begin with. Birthright citizenship is what draws these immigrants into this country. It's free citizenship to their kids just by HAVING one. It's bullshit.

This is a start. You should just go now and educate yourself a little so you have something substantive to hit him with.

[RoyalShock]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the primary purpose of the 14th Amendment was to give citizenship to the newly freed slaves. It's turned into an end-around for the children of illegal aliens, as others have already pointed out.

The whole secessionist boogeyman is silly. States have the constitutional right to secede. That he would speak to these groups doesn't mean he supports secession or feels any state should secede, only a state's right to do so.

[gb13]

...school him on the fact that the REAL reason for the war was because of a fight against central banking...

Really? I haven't read into that before. That's really interesting

Can you point me toward some more information on this?

[lnieves]

About the "neo-confederate" and secession stuff, perhap the most important you have to know is Tom Di Lorenzo's take, he was there and he knows what was really happening in the conference: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/018418.html


Well, I was at that secession conference and presented a paper there. It was sponsored by the Mises Institute, which has nothing to do with Confederates, neo or otherwise, as anyone who surveyed the Institute's programs on its web site (www.mises.org) would know. The PFY did not bother because he is only interested in slandering Ron Paul, not in being a serious journalist.

My paper was about the Northern secessionist tradition prior to the War between the States, including the Hartford, Ct. secession convention of 1814, and the secession movements of the mid-Atlantic states that existed prior to the war (see the book, The Secession Movement in the Middle States by William Wright). The famous abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison was a Northern secessionist whose credo was "No Covenant with Death," the "covenant" being the U.S. Constitition, and "death" being slavery. Other papers had to do with the Quebec secession movement, European secession movements, federalism in general, how the U.S. was created by a war of secession from the British empire, and even "How to Secede in Business" by substituting arbitration for litigation.

But don't take my word for it. The proceedings of the conference, which the PFY is obviously ignorant of, were published as a book: Secession, State and Liberty, edited by Dr. David Gordon, whose Ph.D. from UCLA is in the field of intellectual history. It includes essays by scholars and professors from Emory University, Florida State University, UNLV, University of Montreal, University of South Carolina, and even a lawyer from Buffalo, New York. It was published a few years after the Soviet empire imploded as the result of eleven separate acts of peaceful secession, which made it especially relevant to social scientists.

In fact, secession remains a lively topic of academic discourse, something that the PFY is obviously unfamiliar with. A few weeks ago a secession conference sponsored by the National Endowment for the Humanities was held in Chrleston, South Carolina, featuring some thirty historians and legal scholars. In little Jamie Kirchick's empty mind, the NEH must necessarily be a hotbed of pro-slavery sentiment. (A friend in academe tells me that the participants in this conference spanned the ideological spectrum from left/liberal to Marxist).

Only an ignorant conspiracy theorist like Jamie Kirchick would assume that anyone who studies secession in a scholarly way is necessarily some kind of KKK-sympathizing kook. He knows that Ron Paul will not sue him for defamation because he is a public figure. I, however, am not a public figure.

Good Luck!

[noztnac]

It's a known fact that people travel to the United States specifically to have their children born there in order to get US citizenship. I am currently teaching in South Korean and have a number of students who have US citizenship because their mothers, while pregnant, flew to Hawaii specifically for the purpose of securing US citizenship for their children. That is not right!

[Antonius Stone]

as per the 14th amendment:

The 14th amendment is currently used by judges to say that the States have no right to "discriminate" against illegal immigrants when administering Social Benefits. As such, States must use taxpayer money to extend social programs beyond tax-paying citizens and to illegal immigrants. Sound fair to you?