So, what do you think? How should we determine citizenship and eligability to hold the office of President? Let's just define this already, draft an addendum to the constitution and move forward, please! How hard can this be?
Quite frankly, what makes a forienger who immigrates to the U.S. and feels compelled to serve our millitary placing their life on the line for our citizens, any less eligable for citizenship or less qualified for public office; especially, if they choose to marry and raise a family here? Perhaps, if in addition to millitary service let's say they had fleed a war torn nation. Human right violations were the norm and they fled in search of freedom and a better life, would they be better qualified? Knowing first hand the true impact such atrocities have upon a society and surviving man's inhumanity to man, could make them a better leader whose focus was more about solving some of the massive problems facing us as a whole and striving to truely make a difference in lives, instead of playing the same worn out games the spoiled brat career politicians of today continue to play. You know the ones we have now all grown accustom to and have tolerated for far too long. (For what reason we continue to put up with it all, I have no clue, but I believe we have had our fill!) After all one can not fortget, once they have recited the oath of the U.C.M.J., they have pledged allegience to their fellow bretheren of the U.S.A and are then bound by millitary law.
Furthermore, why should citizenship go strickly through the father in this day and age? Just because a man donated sperm does not make him a parent nor does it make him a central figure or influence in a child's life.
Given the scenerio, the father is an American, but Mom is not. When the child is born, even if born abroad he/she automatically qualifies, right? Say Dad returns to the states, leaving the child behind and the mother becomes sole care taker. She, continues to live abroad within the country of her birth. Now, if the child's citizenship fell under the father's, would you believe them to be more trustworthy and concerned about our country and its needs if later they chose to come to America and exercise their right as an American citizen to run? Considering, their background, culture, and beliefs were very different from our nation as a whole; would you want them making the big decisions affecting your daily life? Would this choice make you feel warm and fuzzy, safe?
We have debated this issue long enough. Qualifications to hold an office as important as president must be clarified and amended; not to mention, it can no longer be based off of the ludicrous, antiquated, chauvanistic philosophy we have held for so long. Roles are changing and boundries are being pushed, we must adapt without all the moronic reteric that only serves to waste time while trying to degrade the opposing party. What purpose does it serve and who does it help? We must know that regardless of policy, the person serving as the Commander and Chief of our nation, has its needs, its people, and its best interests at heart.
Now, taking into consideration the flip side. The mother being American and father foreign; knowing, that although the child may have been born on foriegn soil mom was sole custodian, while the the father had little to no contact or influence upon the child. Mom raises them in the States with the values we consider important, instilling a deep seeding love for our people and the constitutional rights and values we have taken for granted while stressing the need for compassion and charity. Yet, by current law they cannot run. Who would you feel more comfortable with as your President?
No comments:
Post a Comment