1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Non-citizens sue, claim of "constitutional rights"

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by rbell, Dec 1, 2010.

  1. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Ratings:
    +0
    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/connecticut-high-court-hearing-immigrant

    Please. How on earth do non-citizens get "constitutional rights?"

    From the article:
     
  2. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Ratings:
    +0
    Agreed!

    While I do not want to do the Ancient Rome thing...

    There *has* to be some advantage to actually being a Citizen!

    And, being Guarded by the Constitution which I pledged to Guard is one of them!!
     
  3. matt wade

    matt wade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Ratings:
    +112
    You reap what you sow Connecticut. Keep the Dems in power there and you'll continue to get more of the same.
     
  4. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Ratings:
    +0
    Do they pay medicaid taxes?
     
  5. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Ratings:
    +0
    What difference does that make?

    I don't believe that paying medicaid withholding taxes is a requirement for a U.S. citizen to obtain medicaid services.

    The payroll tax withholding is a means of taxing in order to fund the program - not an enrollment fee or guarantee of services.

    Medicaid is needs based - but it is not a program open to every needy person in the world.

    Would you provide medicaid care to every sick person in the world just because they manage to make it into the U.S. legally some how?
     
  6. Don

    Don Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2000
    Messages:
    10,676
    Ratings:
    +561
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I vehemently oppose abortion, and abhor Planned Parenthood; will never utilize their services. Yet a portion of my money is taken by the government and used to support them, and I'm not allowed to "opt out" of that.

    So what bearing does your question have?
     
  7. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Ratings:
    +0
    You know, googling "the rule of law" might help you immensely.
     
  8. freeatlast

    freeatlast New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Ratings:
    +0
    This is our own fault. We the people have put these people into office that continue to rip away our freedoms and rights. This has been smoldering for many years and has taken off in flames with then president Bush. (by the way I voted for him). Now under this president who clearly holds to socialist's agenda we are and will see more of this. Once a freedom or right is lost it is just about impossible to regain it and in the last 15 years we have lost much and sadly there is more to come. When we trade freedoms ands rights for the claim of safety we get and deserve neither

    Our own liberal, apathy, and greed, has and is doing this and the politicians love it. Our government, our courts and our police, departments are filled with corruption. Just in the last week we saw just how corrupt our officials are in the leaks. Because we have allowed these undocumented people to flood our land we no longer have the rule. They have kinsmen who are now in government covering for them. What we are seeing is nothing to what is going to come and all because we have lost our taste. Very soon we will see the Muslim community become as powerful as they are in Europe and Canada and their rights will circumvent the rest of the countries rights.
     
    #8 freeatlast, Dec 1, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 1, 2010
  9. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Ratings:
    +0
    If the First American Revolution was about "taxation without representation" then their paying taxes makes a difference.
     
  10. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Ratings:
    +0
    >You know, googling "the rule of law" might help you immensely.

    from http://www.uiowa.edu/ifdebook/faq/Rule_of_Law.shtml

    II. What is the Rule of Law?
    The rule of law does not have a precise definition, and its meaning can vary between different nations and legal traditions. Generally, however, it can be understood as a legal-political regime under which the law restrains the government by promoting certain liberties and creating order and predictability regarding how a country functions. In the most basic sense, the rule of law is a system that attempts to protect the rights of citizens from arbitrary and abusive use of government power.
     
  11. targus

    targus New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Ratings:
    +0
    Representation?

    In what?

    Participation in a medical services system?

    That is not what "representation" means.
     
  12. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yes, but that was an entire society that was denied representation.

    And, they were all here legally, too!
     
  13. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,013
    Ratings:
    +489
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I hate to be a downer, but many of our founders who crafted the Bill of Rights believed that the rights specified in the amendments to the Constitution were endowed to humankind by their Creator, not human governments.

    They believed that all people deserved to be treated in this manner and that the Bill of Rights only enumerated those basic human rights so that the newly created federal government would not trample on them.

    There was also a concern that a listing of these universally-held human rights would cause the federal government to assume that rights not specified in the first eight Amendments did not exist, so the Ninth and Tenth Amendments were added in an attempt to prevent federal encroachment upon additional human rights that may not have been listed.

    Therefore, it could be argued that the original intent of the Bill of Rights (which is what is usually what someone means when they claim constitutional rights) applies to all humankind, not just citizens. It has to do with the nature of our government, not the citizenship or legal status of those under it's jurisdiction/authority.

    Now this has obviously been denied in our history, most notably to African-Americans held in slavery, but they were not counted 'human' in the same way others were counted human.
     
  14. sag38

    sag38 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Ratings:
    +1
    Wow, what a nice little heart wrenching, tear jerking, response. I'm sure RBell feels so guilty. Shame on him for even suggesting that non-citizens do not have the right to the same benefits that citizens do? Tell me? Who is going to pay for this?
     
  15. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Ratings:
    +0
    Maybe overpaid preachers can pay. Imagine what Osteen, Jakes, etc could provide!
     
  16. StefanM

    StefanM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,024
    Ratings:
    +408
    Financial concerns are secondary to constitutional law.

    If the constitution does not specify that a provision applies only to citizens, then the constitution does not necessarily deny rights to non-citizens.

    Freedom of speech, press, religion, etc. apply both to citizens and non-citizens.

    In this case, I think the lawsuit fails on the merits, but there is sufficient justification to recognize rights of noncitizens in principle.

    Otherwise, we could assert that the government could imprison legal residents without cause and without recourse because non-citizens "do not have constitutional rights."
     
  17. StefanM

    StefanM Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,024
    Ratings:
    +408
    Citizens have a host of political rights that non-citizens do not have.
     
  18. Salty

    Salty 20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,742
    Ratings:
    +670
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Okay, lets look at the facts

    According to CBS (hope thats not too conservative for you) New states there are about 10 million illegals in the US

    According to inplanesite, Benny Hinn makes about 1 million dollars per year - okay simple division. He would be able to give each illegal alien - mmm lets see ten cents! Wow, Benny Hinn, himself can eradicate poverty!!! among the illegals. (of course a family of four would receive a whopping 40 cents)
     
  19. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well, if this money helps, we could then add in all the preachers in the U.S. That should at least be a start. I'm sure Sag38 won't mind helping out! :laugh:
     
  20. matt wade

    matt wade Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Ratings:
    +112
    How about we take all the union dues and use them to pay for the illegal's benefits?
     
Loading...