Its only OK when a Democrat does it!

[bripat9643]

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

false

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

The constitution offers no protection of any kind to foreigners residing on foreign soil.

 

[bripat9643]

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

false

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

When has the supreme court decided on this matter? Where?

this should help you
Do Illegal Immigrants Have Constitutional Rights?

but you shouldn't need help. this is elementary civics stuff.

This discussion isn't about illegal aliens residing within the boundaries of the United States. It's about foreigners residing outside our boundaries.

 

[bripat9643]

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

false

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

the ignorance of these assholes is amazing.

You are in no position to talk, asshole.

 

[ogibillm]

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

false

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

The constitution offers no protection of any kind to foreigners residing on foreign soil.

I don't think I've argued that it does, but you said the constitution was for American citizens only, not for foreigners or illegal aliens. That is incorrect.

 

[ogibillm]

false
The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

When has the supreme court decided on this matter? Where?

this should help you
Do Illegal Immigrants Have Constitutional Rights?

but you shouldn't need help. this is elementary civics stuff.

This discussion isn't about illegal aliens residing within the boundaries of the United States. It's about foreigners residing outside our boundaries.

Fine, but you made a very erroneous statement. I hope you jave learned something today.

 

[bripat9643]

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

false

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

The constitution offers no protection of any kind to foreigners residing on foreign soil.

I don't think I've argued that it does, but you said the constitution was for American citizens only, not for foreigners or illegal aliens. That is incorrect.

No I haven't said that. Go back and check.

 

[bripat9643]

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

When has the supreme court decided on this matter? Where?

this should help you
Do Illegal Immigrants Have Constitutional Rights?

but you shouldn't need help. this is elementary civics stuff.

This discussion isn't about illegal aliens residing within the boundaries of the United States. It's about foreigners residing outside our boundaries.

Fine, but you made a very erroneous statement. I hope you jave learned something today.

You're delusional. Nothing I have posted is the slightest bit erroneous.

 

[ogibillm]

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

When has the supreme court decided on this matter? Where?

this should help you
Do Illegal Immigrants Have Constitutional Rights?

but you shouldn't need help. this is elementary civics stuff.

This discussion isn't about illegal aliens residing within the boundaries of the United States. It's about foreigners residing outside our boundaries.

Fine, but you made a very erroneous statement. I hope you jave learned something today.

You're delusional. Nothing I have posted is the slightest bit erroneous.

Looks like I made my own error. Sorry about that. I confuse you with Slyhunter

 

[frigidweirdo]

Carter Banned Iranians from Coming to US During Hostage Crisis

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Oh and that law there was passed by a DEMOCRAT majority Senate and House AND SIGNED by a DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT!

Like said its OK for a democrat to do it,but its waycist when a Republican says to do it!

The US was in conflict with Iran.

The US is not in conflict with Islam.

See the difference?

"The US is not in conflict with Islam." That's funny. Have you been asleep since September Eighth, 2001? Your ignorance is astonishing. We ARE in conflict with Islam, maybe not ALL Muslims, but we are in conflict with Islam none the less. Just like we where in conflict with Germany in the fourties, maybe not all Germans, but with Germany none the less.

Islam is 1 billion people. How many people carried out 9/11?

19 plus some others, possible 100 people, that's a long way from 1 billion, don't you think?

Ignorance? No, ignorance is suggesting the US is at war with the US when the US uses military facilities in many Muslims countries, is allied with various Muslims countries.

Just because YOU WANT war with Islam, can't think why, they're pretty aggressive people to pick on, and there are a lot of them.

How can you be in conflict with Islam but not all Muslims? That's nonsensical!

Okay, the US was at war with Germany, with the German leadership especially. So, who is the leadership of Islam? You tell me, as you're making this claim.

The only part of your...post... that I feel inclined to address is your claims that:

1. "The US is at war with Islam." (at least I THINK that's what you meant...) Never said that, I said we are in conflict with Islam. Huge difference.
2. "I want war with Islam." No, again, never said that. Certain people of the Muslim faith want war with us. Again, huge differnce.

What's the difference between being in conflict with Islam and being at war with Islam then?

 

[oldsoul]

Carter Banned Iranians from Coming to US During Hostage Crisis

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Oh and that law there was passed by a DEMOCRAT majority Senate and House AND SIGNED by a DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT!

Like said its OK for a democrat to do it,but its waycist when a Republican says to do it!

The US was in conflict with Iran.

The US is not in conflict with Islam.

See the difference?

"The US is not in conflict with Islam." That's funny. Have you been asleep since September Eighth, 2001? Your ignorance is astonishing. We ARE in conflict with Islam, maybe not ALL Muslims, but we are in conflict with Islam none the less. Just like we where in conflict with Germany in the fourties, maybe not all Germans, but with Germany none the less.

Islam is 1 billion people. How many people carried out 9/11?

19 plus some others, possible 100 people, that's a long way from 1 billion, don't you think?

Ignorance? No, ignorance is suggesting the US is at war with the US when the US uses military facilities in many Muslims countries, is allied with various Muslims countries.

Just because YOU WANT war with Islam, can't think why, they're pretty aggressive people to pick on, and there are a lot of them.

How can you be in conflict with Islam but not all Muslims? That's nonsensical!

Okay, the US was at war with Germany, with the German leadership especially. So, who is the leadership of Islam? You tell me, as you're making this claim.

The only part of your...post... that I feel inclined to address is your claims that:

1. "The US is at war with Islam." (at least I THINK that's what you meant...) Never said that, I said we are in conflict with Islam. Huge difference.
2. "I want war with Islam." No, again, never said that. Certain people of the Muslim faith want war with us. Again, huge differnce.

What's the difference between being in conflict with Islam and being at war with Islam then?

First of all, as defined by the Contitution, war can only be declared by congress, as yet they have not even considered such a thing, to the best of my knowledge.
Secondly, just how would a country declare war on a group that is not a soverign state? Really don't know how that could happen...
Third, definitions:
Conflict:
noun
noun: conflict; plural noun: conflicts
ˈkänˌflikt/
a serious disagreement or argument, typically a protracted one.
verb
verb: conflict; 3rd person present: conflicts; past tense: conflicted; past participle: conflicted; gerund or present participle: conflicting
kənˈflikt,ˈkänˌflikt/
be incompatible or at variance; clash.
War:
noun
noun: war; plural noun: wars
a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.
verb
verb: war; 3rd person present: wars; past tense: warred; past participle: warred; gerund or present participle: warring
engage in a war.

I draw your attention particularily to the red definitions.
Hope this clears things up.

 

[oldsoul]

Where? Can you quote and link to the part of the US Constinution that you refer to?

asked and answered

Sorry, must have missed that. Could you refernce the post number, so I can go back and read what you had to say?

it only a 3 page thread look for your self.

Fine, I did. Still not finding it. Must be your over-active imagination at work again. You really should get that checked.
Guess I am done here, unless of course you want to accually quote the clause of the US Constitution that supports your argument.... I'll look again when I have time. See ya.

What you're actually looking for is a clause that would restrict a right solely to citizens. You won't find many.

No, what I am looking for is something, anything that would support your argument. I guess there is nothing.

 

[ogibillm]

asked and answered

Sorry, must have missed that. Could you refernce the post number, so I can go back and read what you had to say?

it only a 3 page thread look for your self.

Fine, I did. Still not finding it. Must be your over-active imagination at work again. You really should get that checked.
Guess I am done here, unless of course you want to accually quote the clause of the US Constitution that supports your argument.... I'll look again when I have time. See ya.

What you're actually looking for is a clause that would restrict a right solely to citizens. You won't find many.

No, what I am looking for is something, anything that would support your argument. I guess there is nothing.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

there you have it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The US was in conflict with Iran.

The US is not in conflict with Islam.

See the difference?

"The US is not in conflict with Islam." That's funny. Have you been asleep since September Eighth, 2001? Your ignorance is astonishing. We ARE in conflict with Islam, maybe not ALL Muslims, but we are in conflict with Islam none the less. Just like we where in conflict with Germany in the fourties, maybe not all Germans, but with Germany none the less.

Islam is 1 billion people. How many people carried out 9/11?

19 plus some others, possible 100 people, that's a long way from 1 billion, don't you think?

Ignorance? No, ignorance is suggesting the US is at war with the US when the US uses military facilities in many Muslims countries, is allied with various Muslims countries.

Just because YOU WANT war with Islam, can't think why, they're pretty aggressive people to pick on, and there are a lot of them.

How can you be in conflict with Islam but not all Muslims? That's nonsensical!

Okay, the US was at war with Germany, with the German leadership especially. So, who is the leadership of Islam? You tell me, as you're making this claim.

The only part of your...post... that I feel inclined to address is your claims that:

1. "The US is at war with Islam." (at least I THINK that's what you meant...) Never said that, I said we are in conflict with Islam. Huge difference.
2. "I want war with Islam." No, again, never said that. Certain people of the Muslim faith want war with us. Again, huge differnce.

What's the difference between being in conflict with Islam and being at war with Islam then?

First of all, as defined by the Contitution, war can only be declared by congress, as yet they have not even considered such a thing, to the best of my knowledge.
Secondly, just how would a country declare war on a group that is not a soverign state? Really don't know how that could happen...
Third, definitions:
Conflict:
noun
noun: conflict; plural noun: conflicts
ˈkänˌflikt/
a serious disagreement or argument, typically a protracted one.
verb
verb: conflict; 3rd person present: conflicts; past tense: conflicted; past participle: conflicted; gerund or present participle: conflicting
kənˈflikt,ˈkänˌflikt/
be incompatible or at variance; clash.
War:
noun
noun: war; plural noun: wars
a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.
verb
verb: war; 3rd person present: wars; past tense: warred; past participle: warred; gerund or present participle: warring
engage in a war.

I draw your attention particularily to the red definitions.
Hope this clears things up.

Yeah, the constitution wasn't written for non-traditional warfare. So, people take what they have and do what they want with it. Declaring war is so 20th Century anyway. How often does the US declare war on countries or groups it is fighting? Does that mean it's not war? No.

 

[rightwinger]

Carter Banned Iranians from Coming to US During Hostage Crisis

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Oh and that law there was passed by a DEMOCRAT majority Senate and House AND SIGNED by a DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT!

Like said its OK for a democrat to do it,but its waycist when a Republican says to do it!

Iran= Country
Muslim = Religion

Now, read the first amendment and get back to me

 

[ogibillm]

Carter Banned Iranians from Coming to US During Hostage Crisis

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Oh and that law there was passed by a DEMOCRAT majority Senate and House AND SIGNED by a DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT!

Like said its OK for a democrat to do it,but its waycist when a Republican says to do it!

Iran= Country
Muslim = Religion

Now, read the first amendment and get back to me

i know the argument would be that the immigrants would not have first amendment protections yet, but banning a religion from immigration goes a long way towards establishing religion here. it certainly shows bias. i don't think that it would fly, but you can bet there would be long court battles over it.
that said, it's not going to happen, so the question is academic.

 

[daws101]

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

false

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

When has the supreme court decided on this matter? Where?

Google it.

 

[daws101]

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

false

The constitution is for American citizens and American Citizens only.

The Constitution does not say citizens it says persons. That means EVERYONE has the rights listed in the Constitution. Even illegals are protected from cruel and unusual punishment for example.

The constitution is for America, not for France so it wouldn't be for France citizens or any other country for that matter. Illegals are residents of another country therefore is not included in our constitution.

The supreme court disagrees.

And an illegal alien has constitutional protections while in the united states

the ignorance of these assholes is amazing.

You are in no position to talk, asshole.

 

[rcfieldz]

it has to do with religion....not nationality. Our constitution ensures religious freedom making Trumps idea unconstitutional.

And I bet you know the difference between a Latin immigrant granted a visa over an illegal? Just by lookin' at 'em.

 

[oldsoul]

"The US is not in conflict with Islam." That's funny. Have you been asleep since September Eighth, 2001? Your ignorance is astonishing. We ARE in conflict with Islam, maybe not ALL Muslims, but we are in conflict with Islam none the less. Just like we where in conflict with Germany in the fourties, maybe not all Germans, but with Germany none the less.

Islam is 1 billion people. How many people carried out 9/11?

19 plus some others, possible 100 people, that's a long way from 1 billion, don't you think?

Ignorance? No, ignorance is suggesting the US is at war with the US when the US uses military facilities in many Muslims countries, is allied with various Muslims countries.

Just because YOU WANT war with Islam, can't think why, they're pretty aggressive people to pick on, and there are a lot of them.

How can you be in conflict with Islam but not all Muslims? That's nonsensical!

Okay, the US was at war with Germany, with the German leadership especially. So, who is the leadership of Islam? You tell me, as you're making this claim.

The only part of your...post... that I feel inclined to address is your claims that:

1. "The US is at war with Islam." (at least I THINK that's what you meant...) Never said that, I said we are in conflict with Islam. Huge difference.
2. "I want war with Islam." No, again, never said that. Certain people of the Muslim faith want war with us. Again, huge differnce.

What's the difference between being in conflict with Islam and being at war with Islam then?

First of all, as defined by the Contitution, war can only be declared by congress, as yet they have not even considered such a thing, to the best of my knowledge.
Secondly, just how would a country declare war on a group that is not a soverign state? Really don't know how that could happen...
Third, definitions:
Conflict:
noun
noun: conflict; plural noun: conflicts
ˈkänˌflikt/
a serious disagreement or argument, typically a protracted one.
verb
verb: conflict; 3rd person present: conflicts; past tense: conflicted; past participle: conflicted; gerund or present participle: conflicting
kənˈflikt,ˈkänˌflikt/
be incompatible or at variance; clash.
War:
noun
noun: war; plural noun: wars
a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state.
verb
verb: war; 3rd person present: wars; past tense: warred; past participle: warred; gerund or present participle: warring
engage in a war.

I draw your attention particularily to the red definitions.
Hope this clears things up.

Yeah, the constitution wasn't written for non-traditional warfare. So, people take what they have and do what they want with it. Declaring war is so 20th Century anyway. How often does the US declare war on countries or groups it is fighting? Does that mean it's not war? No.

In the constitutional sense, yes it does, mean it's not a war.

 

[oldsoul]

Sorry, must have missed that. Could you refernce the post number, so I can go back and read what you had to say?

it only a 3 page thread look for your self.

Fine, I did. Still not finding it. Must be your over-active imagination at work again. You really should get that checked.
Guess I am done here, unless of course you want to accually quote the clause of the US Constitution that supports your argument.... I'll look again when I have time. See ya.

What you're actually looking for is a clause that would restrict a right solely to citizens. You won't find many.

No, what I am looking for is something, anything that would support your argument. I guess there is nothing.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

there you have it.

I wonder why noone has brought this before the supreme court... Maybe YOU should. Let me know when they rule the law as unconstitutional.