| Full Topic |
Seasoned...
Joined: Sat Oct 21st, 2017
Location: Near The Pointy End , USA
Posts: 1299
Status:
Offline
Reputation: 
Reputation Points: $user_rep
With that I believe in the power of the people
With that it is my belief as the forefathers did in the sense that you can't control what you didn't create. Therefore I believe as it has been written in the three most prestigious documents known to this country and others that it is God, man, and then governments that benefit.
So where I don't find this to be a post of political party(s) but a post of political issues and information, lets keep the relevance to relevant things outside of such parties with exception of those things used in reference. I DO NOT want to engage myself or others into a Flame-war of my political affiliation is better than yours argument but rather focus on things we take for granted as truths when they may not be.
I want to create a viable source of information for people to not necessarily take my own word for things but spend the time to research your own conclusions and ideas to formulate your OWN informed opinion.
As the OP, I cannot say I won't be posting items of the utmost "controversy" to your beliefs or even upbringing but I figure if there's a way to leave it out of other posts and contain it here within a single post, so it shall.
NOTES:
- IF you are stating FACTS, please cite your resources, otherwise they will be taken as YOUR opinion
- IF you are CITING resources, please try to make sure they are credible, otherwise they will be construed as parroted opinions of others
- IF you don't have a methodology of taking new information with an open mind and using that information to further research shared information, this thread will go to a -storm very quickly and defeats the purpose of the threads true intent
- IF you are easily offended by freedom of thought, this thread may not suit your fancy either
- I ENCOURAGE positive thoughts and critical thinking, simply shouting [CAPS LOCK WHAT] louder doesn't mean you're any more right or wrong but it does show your abilities to NOT engage in proper dialog.
- Name calling blatantly will not be a just cause or answer and very limited in tolerance, should you have a disbelief in something; call it out and discuss why and where your information came from.
- Dis-credatation is not a justifiable means of proving someone wrong by your opinions, show your work not your opinion(s) so others may see an error on their part and also engage in taking new information to correct their assertions
So I am putting it out there now that if it turns out we cannot be adults, that I would hope that the mods would NOT destroy any valuable information found within and clean up the last verbal transgression and just lock it down whether temporarily or for all time.
Although the course of the material may seem to/or NOT correlate from post to post or topic to topic. There is likely small to NO order to things as that cannot be controlled by interests of following posters or the OP's intent to keep the thread from failure to interest others.
I think the freedom of speech and thoughts can be had at a table of capable minds in an around the campfire, beer bottle toasting, man to man, conversation.. Join us?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With That..
The Expatriation Act of 1868 was an act of the 40th United States Congress regarding the right to renounce one's citizenship. ... Its intent was to counter other countries' claims that U.S. citizens owed them allegiance; it was an explicit rejection of the feudal common law principle of perpetual allegiance.
The United States was founded by the act of expatriation of citizens from England, but ironically the U.S. itself actually did not grant its own citizens the right to renounce citizenship.
There is no right to expatriation in either the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution or early federal laws.
Until the the mid-19th century, the United States implicitly followed the English common-law tradition of “perpetual allegiance,†[img]https://i0.wp.com/web.archive.org/web/20120919020935im_/http://renunciationguide.com/Images/Picture_06.jpg?resize=182%2C272[/img]a feudal concept in which all natural-born citizens are considered to inherit upon birth a debt of obligation to the country in which they are born for the state protection they receive.
Because this feudal debt of obligation can never be canceled, the citizen can never relinquish his citizenship.
The irony of the U.S. following a system of “perpetual allegiance†was not unnoticed by lawmakers at the time. On the one hand, the U.S. welcomed and protected immigrants who expatriated from their countries. On the other hand, the U.S. itself continued to follow a medieval concept prohibiting expatriation.
In 1868, Congress passed a law to rectify the situation and explicitly endorsed “the right of expatriationâ€.
Praising expatriation as “a natural and inherent right of all peopleâ€, Congress declared in 1868 that any act of the government which “denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation†is “inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government.â€
The language in this law clearly recognizes the “right to expatriateâ€. It's important to note, though, that this act does not create a “right†in the legal sense. It's not a right similar to free speech, practice of religion, etc. It's not written into the Constitution. And although it can't be known with certainty until tested, it seems fairly likely that Congress could revoke this “right†at any time and permanently ban renunciation of citizenship. The Constitution gives Congress the power to establish rules of granting citizenship (naturalization), so they presumably also have the implicit power to determine the rules of taking it away (expatriation).
Expatriation can take two forms: the right of the citizen to sever his ties with the state, and the ability of the state of sever its ties with the citizen. Through several laws and court decisions, both sides of expatriation have been modified. At various times in the early 20th century, [img]https://i2.wp.com/web.archive.org/web/20120919020935im_/http://renunciationguide.com/Images/uslawcourts.jpg?resize=300%2C225[/img]it was held that an American could lose citizenship through acts such as military desertion, failure to pay taxes, acceptance of citizenship of a foreign country, and even a woman's marriage to a foreigner (the Supreme Court [url=http://web.archive.org/web/20120919020935/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=239&invol=299]ruled[/url] in 1915 that an American woman who marries a foreigner loses her U.S. citizenship while the marriage remains in effect, but would resume citizenship upon the dissolution of marriage).
Finally, in the case of [url=http://web.archive.org/web/20120919020935/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=387&invol=253]Afroyim v. Rusk[/url] in 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned these rulings, declaring that involuntary loss of citizenship was not constitutional and that nationality can be taken away from a U.S. citizen only if he gives his consent. A later Supreme Court ruling in 1980 ([url=http://web.archive.org/web/20120919020935/http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=444&invol=252]Vance v. Terrazas[/url]) and the subsequent Immigration and Nationality Act passed by Congress in 1986 further clarified that this consent to relinquish citizenship cannot be implied through acts such as voting in a foreign election; rather, there must be a clear preponderance of evidence that the citizen intended to renounce his citizenship.
The law of the United States regarding expatriation has since remained constant:
It is now settled law that every U.S. citizen may renounce citizenship at any time. On the other hand, the government may not withdraw nationality from a citizen based on any actions the citizen takes; loss of citizenship can only result when the there is clear evidence that the person intends to expatriate.
Since 1990, the Department of State policy based on these laws and court rulings has been to revoke an individual's citizenship if and only if an individual appears in person at a U.S. embassy or consulate abroad and explicitly declares his intention to renounce citizenship.
Citations:
Citizenship, Taxation and Expatriation: Background and History
http://www.14th-amendment.com/Statutes_Proclamations/Statutes/FORTIETH_CONGRESS-Sess._II.-Ch._249/Expatriation.pdf
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/40th-congress/session-2/c40s2ch249.pdf
____________________
"Be never first, never last and never noticed." - Unknown
"The slave is held most securely when he is held by the chains of his own will and of his own fears, and when he is locked down by his own slavish desires for a comfortable life." - Michael Bunker
"Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur" - ~ attributed to Petronius (Gaius Petronius Arbiter (ca. 27–66 AD))
Roman courtier during the reign of Nero.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it." - Thomas Paine
~ Undrstm8ed Truckumentry Write Up Pg.
~ Undrstm8ed Trailermentry Write Up Pg.
.