|
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653
I have no life
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 21,653 |
Originally posted by Antonio:
Originally posted by Davo:
Did what? Be president? Yep, Reagan did that.
I don't think the laws should be changed to allow for foreign-born presidents. You let that one fall and soon to follow will be the age requirements, etc. I don't think people should get so wrapped up in Arnold's popularity that they want to go around changing the Constitution. He's not that great.
Actually I think Arnold is a fresh face to the republicans. I would gladly pick him over GWB. Not because of his popularity but because of his beliefs.
That's because he is a democrat in republican clothes.
Regardless of his party affliation, I don't think he should be prez, and I also think he wouldn't get voted in either.
98.5 SVT
91 Escort GT (almost sold)
96 ATX Zetec (i brake to watch you swerve)
FS: SVT rear sway bar
WTB: Very cheap beater
CEG Dragon Run - October 13-15
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Quote:
If you applied your logic of discrimination universally, then you would have to say preventing anyone on earth from running for president is discriminatory.
No because the other 2 requisites for running for President are available to every citizen equally. Everyone will eventually be 35 and everyone can eventually live in the US for 14 years. There's discrimination with basis (such as the other 2 requirements which have a logical reasoning behind them) and discrimination without basis -- there is no basis as to why a President needs to be a natural-born citizen.
The fact that a person is more "qualified" to be President if they were born outside the US to US citizens, live outside the US for 40 years then move to the US and run for President at 54 than someone who moved to the US when they were 3 days old and lived here for 54 years is absurd.
Take the following 3 examples of Presidential-wannabes:
1> A natural-born citizen who spent 40 years in France and moved to the US 14 years ago
2> A foreign-born citizen who lived in a foreign country less than a year before moving to the US and living here 50 years before running for President
3> A foreign-born citizen who ran away from the communistic government of his home nation and moved to the US at an adult age in order to pursue the greater potential that a person has in this country
All else being equal, who would you rather have running the country? The fact that, of the above, only the first person even has the option of running for President is mind-bogglingly stupid.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by sigma:
The fact that a person is more "qualified" to be President if they were born outside the US to US citizens, live outside the US for 40 years then move to the US and run for President at 54 than someone who moved to the US when they were 3 days old and lived here for 54 years is absurd.
Except for the fact that the Constititution says that's the way it is.
EDIT: Plus this logic assumes that everyone on Earth was born with the right to run for president of the United States, which is ridiculous.
Last edited by Davo; 11/14/04 11:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
And how many times have we amended the Constitution?
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,807
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,807 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by sigma:
The fact that a person is more "qualified" to be President if they were born outside the US to US citizens, live outside the US for 40 years then move to the US and run for President at 54 than someone who moved to the US when they were 3 days old and lived here for 54 years is absurd.
Except for the fact that the Constititution says that's the way it is.
That is absurd logic. All the more reason to add another amendment and review some of the others.
99 CSVT Green/Tan
# 84 of 2760
Built on Wednesday, September 30, 1998
15.376 @ 92.00 MPH Stock
75,000Km
96 Contour GL
2.5L V6 ATX 170,000Km
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by sigma:
And how many times have we amended the Constitution?
Of all the possible ways to amend the Constitution, eliminating the 'discrimination' of not allowing foreign-born presidents is last on the list. Not that there is any significant reason to do so in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,155
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,155 |
^^^Agreed. The founding fathers didnt have to consider if scanning the internet and tapping phone lines was invasion of privacy and thus breaching our rights.  They didn't have this problem, but today we do. Some things need a bit of change and if you don't like George W watching your email porn videos then you don't have to use the internet. This is just my view on it; with new technology, we need to precautions. Hell, cell phones can be used as bombs now (prolly have been for a while and it wasn't "newsworthy" until late). Expect new security for those as well. See what I mean?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
I'm confused.
You believe that the requirement should stay in the Constitution because it's written that way, yet you apparently have some "list" (of which this issue is at the bottom of) of changes to the writing that you would like see.
So changing the Constitution is okay as long as you agree with it?
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,578
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,578 |
I am sorry, but you know what, nobody NOT British will be a British Prime Minister, nobody not Canadian will become Canadian Prime Minister, there won't be a non-French person as the French Prime Minister, and I highly doubt there will be an non-native born American President. People don't want a someone not born in that country to run that country.
2004 Ford Freestar V6
Boogity Boogity Boogity, Let's go racin Boys!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Originally posted by Renee:
I am sorry, but you know what, nobody NOT British will be a British Prime Minister, nobody not Canadian will become Canadian Prime Minister, there won't be a non-French person as the French Prime Minister, and I highly doubt there will be an non-native born American President. People don't want a someone not born in that country to run that country.
Okay. What's your point? Because no one would vote for them they should't be allowed the opportunity? People aren't likely to vote for someone who went to prison for 25 years either, but they have the right to run if they want.
This isn't about who people will vote for, this about allowing all US citizens the right to run for President. Who cares if any of them ever win. They should still be allowed the right.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
