You must log in or register to comment.
Also airlines won’t let a pregnant woman travel at that point
Is that true? Sounds kind of discriminatory.
Certainly you can, but a lot of hurdles to restrictions. And most obgyns won’t approve you if you have any risk factors.
sounds more like they don’t need a medical emergency mid flight aka 10km above the ocean
A quick internet search suggests 36 weeks (eight months), which is well into the third trimester, is the most common start of restrictions, and many airlines will accept a doctor’s note the woman is low risk even past that. It was a 2008 election blip when the media got ahold of Sarah Palin flying while in labor because she wanted her special-needs baby delivered by the medical team that had prepared for him, which suggests even the written restrictions in airline policy are not consistently enforced.
If a doctor clears you, they can’t deny it.
Sure they can. “My doctor said I can!” Well, they say you can’t. Why would a doctor’s note get you on an airplane?
It would shed the liability from the Airline.
I mean, sure, maybe in the ensuing lawsuit they could be like hey, her doctor said it was cool, but it doesn’t change the fact that there’s a baby being born on an airplane in transit. Nobody wants that, airlines will shut that down, and it’s not discrimination, it’s just a good decision.
deleted by creator
tbh I had no idea Europe was so racist. Citizenship based on “blood” sounds like something out of the middle ages.
It’s based on paperwork, not blood.
You can just turn up, release your spawn and claim it belongs there. We’re not frogs in a pond.
What a cringe attitude to have. People born in a country should have citizenship.
You love your pearly gates and blocking people out in Europe, don’t you?
People born in a country should have citizenship.
Why?
Because it assures that people raised there aren’t separated from the country of origin. It blocks issues. It’s better. Why do you think they shouldn’t?
Being the child of a tourist is not the same as being raised somewhere.
The kind of Ius Soli the US practices gives citizenship to the children of tourists and people being born in a plane flying over the country, without having been raised there.
Most european nations have special citizenship rights if you grew up in that nation or were born there after one of your parents has resided there at least some time.
Example Germany:
Children of non-German parents acquire German citizenship at birth if at least one parent has a permanent residence permit and resided in Germany for at least five years prior to the child’s birth.
Btw. after residing legally in Germany for 5 years the parent can themselves acquire german citizenship, so can the child upon turning 18, even if they weren’t born in Germany.
Example France:
Children born in France to foreign parents may acquire citizenship from age 13 subject to residence conditions. A child born in France to foreign parents becomes a French citizen automatically upon turning 18, provided that they reside in France on their 18th birthday and have had their primary residence in France for a total (but not necessarily continuous) period of at least 5 years since the age of 11. Children born in France to two stateless parents receive French nationality automatically at birth.
Also you can always go through the normal ways of acquiring citizenship. Upon turning 18 and having been raised in the country you usually fulfill all requirements for it.
That’s crazy that you need to be 13, or 18 to get citizenship in france. That’s some gated communities type shit. Personally, I’m not a fan of nymbys.
How so? Seems reasonable to me to have the same citizenship as my immediate family. And if you want to change it you can apply for it and get it no problem.
You shouldn’t have to apply to be a citizen of somewhere you’ve lived your whole life. If your parents were immigrants and you’re not, you should have dual citizenship from birth.
Also, citizenship shouldn’t exist, but if it has to, it should be permissive enough that someone could never be refused citizenship of the only country they’ve ever lived in.
Oh wow, you are really doubling down on proving OPs point, aren’t you?
Yes. People doubling down on proving their own points is a normal thing.
Countries that use Jus Soli usually also have Jus Sanguinis. The USA for example. My friend is a US citizen despite not being born there because his mother is a US citizen.
Not having Jus Sanguinis would be downright horrible. Imagine your mother moves back to her home country and if you want to follow her you have to clear immigration hurdles.
Yeah having it as well is good. Using only it is inhumane and barbaric.
For that matter, aren’t borders kinda inhumane and barbaric in the first place? They declare some people as second-rate. They trap people in poor dictatorships, but are oh so permeable for conflict minerals or products of sweatshops
Could your point be that generally more ways to become citizen is a better than less?
Yeah
This only works if you go to the green countries:
Edit: Source
You got a very loose concept of “nazi”
You are aware I’m talking about birthright citizenship here yes?
I in fact did not.
Chad it is then.
What a chad move
Onward to Canada!
It’s pretty telling about how much Americans know about other countries that the assumption is that Jus Soli is the norm.
I need to tell my brother to vacation in Uruguay this winter
among latam countries, probably the best one to move to now
Chile would be good. It has a fairly strong passport, which I believe is stronger than the USA one in 2025 (before Trump), since it can still travel to the EU visa free.
México is on it’s way to fascism so… Might want to check somewhere else
Didn’t they just elect a fairly liberal president?
They just elected Claudia Sheinbaum, who is seen as being extremely close to the outgoing president AMLO. Some people were suggesting that she was so close to him that it was really his way of getting another term as president, similar to how Putin stepped down as president of Russia to become PM while Dmitry Medvedev became president in name only.
How true is that? It’s hard to say. My guess is that a lot of it is sexism, thinking that a woman can’t think for herself and a woman president will turn to someone else for the important decisions.
But, it’s true that under AMLO, there was a lot of democratic backsliding in Mexico. OTOH, Mexico has been dominated by PAN and PRI for decades. In fact, PRI won 14 elections in a row between 1928 and 1994. It wasn’t until Vincente Fox in 2000 that PAN was even a factor. So, there’s a lot of the power structures in Mexico geared towards supporting PRI and PAN.
They were probably undermining a lot of the things AMLO wanted to accomplish. If he had followed all the rules and norms he might not have been able to accomplish anything because the establishment would have blocked everything he tried to do. That doesn’t excuse his rule and law breaking, but it does contextualize it.We’ll see what happens with Sheinbaum. I, for one, am fucking thrilled that Mexico’s president has a PhD in energy engineering. The fact she’s a woman is also historical, but to me the doctorate is more important.
Thanks for proving my point, you have no idea what is going on inside my country, yet already stepped in to parrot the propaganda going all over Reddit and Lemmy.
They just elected Claudia Sheinbaum, who is seen as being extremely close to the outgoing president AMLO. Some people were suggesting that she was so close to him that it was really his way of getting another term as president, similar to how Putin stepped down as president of Russia to become PM while Dmitry Medvedev became president in name only.
How true is that? It’s hard to say.
Oh let me give you the missing piece, the Kks (aka. AMLO) is still living inside Palacio Nacional and forced Shitbaum to live there too (she said during her campaign she was analysing not living there and just going back to what previous presidents did), from there he’s still giving her instructions and telling her what to do and say.
Hence why we mexicans call her the presirvienta (like a presidential maid), as the expresident Kks is still calling the shots and telling her what to do and say, most of the picks for goverment positions were his picks, not hers, and she’s still working to make the expresident’s sons richer (example: they were ordered to give the vapes back to the black market because his son wanted that control and money, they passed it under the excuse of health reasons, but those same reasons could apply to tobacco and alcohol, but they feigned ignorance so by summer, any kind of electrical smoking device will be banned, yet they have caught the expresident’s son vaping multiple times).My guess is that a lot of it is sexism, thinking that a woman can’t think for herself and a woman president will turn to someone else for the important decisions.
Please don’t swallow the Kool-Aid that deep, most people don’t give 2 shits if it’s a man or woman as president, but we care when the expresident Kks said she was gonna be doing what he started and she said it was right, she was gonna do what was already in movement, no analysis or question about it, just as she’s told to do (wish I was joking but that was her electoral platform).
She’s called a puppet or presirvienta because she acts like one, she doesn’t dare to stand up for herself (not even to apply the nepotism she wished to) because Morena and allies are a fucking cult.They were probably undermining a lot of the things AMLO wanted to accomplish. If he had followed all the rules and norms he might not have been able to accomplish anything because the establishment would have blocked everything he tried to do. That doesn’t excuse his rule and law breaking, but it does contextualize it.
This is true, the destruction of the mangle, burning fuel oil to stop the green energies, berating of the air space, worsening the educational curriculum, giving almost full control to the military and the electoral fraud, all those were things that the Kks wouldn’t have done if he followed the law, hence why his crussade agains the magistery has been consumated under the rule of Shitbaum (as she was ordered to do), now we will have people who have no idea about laws (some didn’t even knew they were nominated) voted in next summer, all so they can do as they please without being contested (and Lemmy users were celebrating this).
I mean, people criticize US for giving Trump full power by filling congress and such with Republicans and placing conspirationists in places of power, here is the same, everything is filled with Morena’s cultists, yet I don’t see them being criticized for passing everything without even reading it just because the Kks ordered to.We’ll see what happens with Sheinbaum. I, for one, am fucking thrilled that Mexico’s president has a PhD in energy engineering.
Oh yes, a PhD she cheated to get, sadly the UNAM didn’t have the balls to act on it (if they had, she wouldn’t have been able to run for president) even when they had all the proof on their plate, they just waited until she was elected and buried it deep.
Even if it was a real PhD, what good is it? She already gutted the funds for science, art, medicine (vaccines for the newborns? medicine for the people with cancer? COVID vaccines? fuck them all, amirite?), schools, public transportation, general maintenance for public services, the organisms that are meant to keep goverment in check (CNDH, INAI, INE, IFT and such); she supports her boss’ antivaxx position, won’t be taking back power illegally given to the military and experimented with Ivermectin during covid on patients without their consent during her time as governor.The fact she’s a woman is also historical,
And she already shitted all over that, during her time as governor she speciallized on throwing the special forces on the feminist protests to protect the image of the expresident.
During her election proccess she was the one making mysoginist remarks.
She refuses to meet with feminist movements or the mothers looking for their missing families and (as I said before) she’s keeping the CNDH (the organism that is supposed to keep the human rights for the citizens) defunded and paralized.
Everyone who isn’t licking their boots, is a traitor, a misogynist, a racist, ungrateful, fascist and many other insults she keeps slinging every day from her misinformation platform (again, something the Kks forced her to keep doing).
Just because she is a woman who claims to be feminist doesn’t mean she is one (just like when a populist claims to be from the left)… at least, her acts speak louder and against her.but to me the doctorate is more important.
See my previous point on why it’s pointless wether she has one or not.
All in all, thanks for showing everyone why I can’t recommend my people to move to Lemmy, most of us complain about mexican reddit mods being in cahoots or too permisive when it comes to propagandists from our goverment, their comments might get buried and they might flail insults everywhere, but they aren’t even warned.
Here we have a lot of normal(?) users giving their uninformed opinion about our country and (as you can see) anyone who gets angry (with good reason) about it just gets downvoted to hell and just go source? source? source?, but guess what? the fucking sources are there but they are all in spanish (because mexican, lol) so it’s fucking pointless (also most of those claims aren’t hard to find, but, again, you have to speak spanish).
This is heaven for the propagandists.I’ve talked with other mexican Reddit users and they don’t dare to create a community here for the same reason, we knew what happened to Mujico (again, they federate with grad so not a great example) and we fear to get overwhelmed by people who have no idea what’s actually happening in México, but they just have to parrot the propaganda.
Just for the lols, let me drop some decent (maybe decent is a strong word, but you get the idea) critics of this goverment just in case someone actually understand spanish:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqKDHbrcN8Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtJWGZW7WtgKks (aka. AMLO) is still living inside Palacio Nacional
Do you have any evidence for that? Because it sounds like an unhinged conspiracy theory. The official story is that he’s writing his book from his estate in Chiapas. But, maybe you have proof that isn’t true?
from there he’s still giving her instructions and telling her what to do and say
Again, any evidence for that? Or is it just “everybody knows she can’t think for herself”.
they were ordered to give the vapes back to the black market because his son wanted that control
Ok… again, any evidence or is this just what your brother’s cousin’s best friend’s dog heard on Facebook?
Oh yes, a PhD she cheated to get
Again… any evidence for these claims?
most of those claims aren’t hard to find, but, again, you have to speak spanish
The claims aren’t hard to find, but what about the proof? Si tienes pruebas, muestramelas. And, I’m not talking youtube videos, actual proof, because you really sound unhinged.
You picked and chose whatever fitted your narrative for your reply, that’s all I need to know about you and your intentions.
This is the problem with Lemmy, I already told you some things happened during the elections, did you even try to search for them? Of course not, because you are here to spread a narrative, not to confirm it.I am done with you as you already showed more signs of being a propaganda account (the usual responses and a pick and choose attitude).
I told my wife we’re going on an extended vacation in
KenyaTanzania. She sounds stoked.What if I go to the gray countries? Do I despawn?
They have deathright citizenship. You automatically become a citizen if you die in their territory.
You can’t go there until the next expansion.
Either no data or they do not have birthright citizenship
Green: unlimited birthright citizenship Red: Limited birthright Citizenship Gray: (At least from my own country, Switzerland): No birthright citizenship
hmmmmm, weird that the EU is so recessive in terms of birthright citizenship.
recessive? what is recessive about this?
Your parents can take a citizenship test and you’ll automatically be a citizen as well.
Just being born here doesn’t make you a citizen. You must at the very least be able to speak the language. Having a citizenship test makes absolute sense.
Birthright citizenship is an absolutely stupid idea.
Just being born here doesn’t make you a citizen. You must at the very least be able to speak the language.
Ummmm are you expecting 2 weeks old infant to speak German?
I expect the parents to speak german.
But I suspect you already knew that and just wanted to be the pigeon that shits all over the chessboard.
Really proving the ‘uptight wanker’ Swiss stereotype there.
Bye.
Nice right-wing viewpoint you got there, seems to be working. Fuck the red states. Or if you aren’t American, fuck the right in general.
Birthright citizenship is an absolutely stupid idea.
It’s no more stupid than citizenship by descent. Why should someone get citizenship just because of the citizenship of their parents? Shouldn’t they have to live in the country? Shouldn’t they speak the language? Shouldn’t they go through the country’s school system?
Europe’s combination of freedom of movement and only Jus Sanguinis has resulted in a situation where there are lots of people with citizenship to a place they’ve never lived, and no citizenship to the place they’ve lived their entire lives.
Really though, how citizenship should be awarded depends on if it’s an obligation or an opportunity. If a country is at war and drafting all citizens of a certain age, citizenship is an obligation the state puts on its citizens. If a country is at peace and provides a social safety net to all citizens, citizenship is an opportunity for its citizens. If the world were fair, people would be able to choose whether or not they wanted citizenship when they reached adulthood. It shouldn’t be something that happened automatically to children based either on who their parents were or on where they were born.
I think that the Restricted Birthright citizenship which is most common in Europe tries to navigate somewhere between those two extremes - in it basically if you’re a Resident in that country for more than X years (from what I’ve seen usually X years is 2 years) then your children born there get citizenship.
It filters out freeloading - well-off people who have no personal investment in a country and its future and never contributed to it in any way, just flying over and having their kids there to give them citizenship - whilst still extending the same rights as locals have to those who, whilst not having the local nationality, are participating members of that society.
I think the fairest way is to give equal treatment (including giving the local nationality to their children and making it available to they themselves after a few years living there) to those who are participating members of a society but not to those who are not members of that society, and that would also mean that the fairest treatment would be that the children of local nationals who have long ago left (and the children themselves never in fact lived there) do not get that nationality automatically for merely their parents having it.
Ultimately I think nationality should be earned by living as part of a Society and when they’re born children, having not have had a chance to “earn” it, would inherited that from the or parents.
That said some level of obtaining nationality based on the nationality of one’s parents makes sense to cover the time gaps of people who moved abroad and had children there before they could qualify for the nationality of the country they were born with, since otherwise those children would be stateless.
As for the decision mechanism being “years legally living in a country” it’s just the simplest and most equal for all (passing no judgment for things like what people do for a living) way of judging “participating in that Society” whilst only excluding people who were neither invited in nor taken in because they’ve truly need help (i.e. it’s only for legal immigrants and refugees).
Might I suggest a second good reason for South American countries— when nuclear war hits the US, and it will, the southern hemisphere has a shot of surviving a nuclear winter. Billions will die but mostly in the northern hemisphere, even after accounting for fallout spread.
What a ray of sunshine
That’s what everybody will be saying in the Northern Hemisphere every time there is a break in the nuclear winter cloud cover, only with more feeling of joy (so, more exclamation marks!!!).
Typical inaccurate American meme, fucking do better. Jesus fucking Christ.
Haha, that’s not how it works outside the US.
*for the most part.
Some places it does.
Come to Brazil!
And weren’t they talking about getting rid of “birth right” citizenship in the US? So that might not even be how it works in the US anymore.
They can’t without a constitutional amendment. They might still try to argue that the current constitution says something it doesn’t; they might just extrajudicially say “fuck you” to it.
But the only ones talking about it are assholes and - to be clear - not a majority of Americans.
As much as people are criticizing the proposed changes to this concept in the US, yes, this is true. In many countries that are arguably more free and democratic than the US even, this is not the way citizenship works and the post comes off as uninformed.
TIL the rest of the Americas don’t exist
Name a non-US country in the Americas that is not
- Are already closer to fascism than the US
- Currently threatened by the US
- Poverty stricken and lacking basic infrastructure (electricity, plumbing, internet) to a majority of the country.
OP said “overseas”. Generally Canada and Mexico aren’t considered “overseas” from the US, since you can drive there. Probably most people would consider South America to be “overseas” from the US, but I think it’s more commonly used for routes that involve crossing an ocean: Europe, Asia, Africa, etc.
Don’t choose Germany, though, we (and a lot of nations, actually) still for some reason have citizenship-by-blood/heritage laws more or less straight out of the 19th century, not citizenship-by-birthplace laws.
No European country has unrestricted jus soli for nationality. Ireland was the last one to restrict nationality by-soil to children of long term legal residents, which is the same as Germany.
As a German myself I would like to here some arguments why citizen by the place you happen to be at birth is better?
Both jus soli (citizenship by birth) and jus sanguinis (citizenship by blood) exist more for historical reasons than because one is better than the other. Both are simply a way to try and make citizenship a more clear-cut thing, because it’s as close to being a made-up thing as you can get, especially in cases such as parents having a different nationality to the child (which is even more confusing when both parents are of different nationalities).
Jus soli is more common in the Americas due to various factors, including an incentive towards immigration from richer countries during colonial times and the various movements towards emancipation of the enslaved peoples a few centuries later, but the fact remains that neither system is any more arbitrary than the other. Jus soli is often favored because it simplifies things like immigration and asylum seeking and reduces statelessness, which is still a significant issue that affects millions of people worldwide, mostly around war-torn areas.
As mentioned in another response, enfranchisement is also a very important issue that jus soli resolves, although a significant part of it is also due to other, unrelated citizenship laws that may not necessarily conflict with jus sanguinis.
The paper trail of blood citizenship would be a lot easier to lose.
Why would citizenship be based on where your parents are from?
My parents of different nationalities had me in a third country. It would be really really shit for them (and me) if I didn’t share their nationality. They would have had a foreign child, who would almost always go for a citizenship as soon as possible anyway.
Much easier to just give the kid a passport if their parents have one.
And since I was born in a country that DOES have birthplace citizenship, I technically have three nationalities (only two passports though, way too much work to get the third one)
Dual ctizenship. Have both. Let the kid be of two nations.
Citizenship by blood can be discriminating to children of immigrants. Say, you’re born in USA and spent all your life in there, would be spit on the face not considering you as a citizen
And where do you draw the line anyway? Especially in North America, only first Nations could be citizens?
Deal
Basically: Resident enfranchisement. It’s weird, when people born in our country and having lived here their whole life can’t vote outside of local elections. My own father, for example, had a Dutch background, and was never allowed to vote in federal elections until his death. (Neither he nor I even spoke/speak a single phrase of Dutch)
Yes, things have gotten somewhat better and easier with applications for citizenship, but that there are hurdles like that to begin with, is a bit… weird.
That’s fine and is what most European countries have. What they have is minimum levels to say that a parent is resident (e.g. over a couple of years of a legal status). This is to avoid pregnant women doing exactly what the OP suggests. Make journeys last minute just to get their child a different nationality.
Yeah, the way things work in Norway and I expect in most other European countries is that you don’t get a citizenship for just being born here, but if you’re born and raised here, then by the time you’re of school age you’d have lived here long enough to become a citizen, and unless your parents isolated you, you shouldn’t have any problems with language requirements.
Basically the system here is “stay here for long enough and make a bit of effort for integration and sure you can become a citizen”.
Of course, the far right loves to portray this as “unrestricted immigration” and make it harder for people to do that, or even live normally, get education and services for their kids, etc. And then complain when the result is people who feel that the system isn’t working for them, or who have trouble because they’re uneducated and poorly integrated anywhere.
I wish. My ancestors moved to the US from Germany in the 19th or early 20th century, but I’m pretty sure I’m not eligible for German citizenship.
Why would you be?
Because that’s what true “citizenship-by-blood/heritage laws more or less straight out of the 19th century” would imply.
In 2025 they just mean “if either of your parents was a citizen when you were born, you can be too”
Because their family has lived in Germany for a hundred years and they have no link to another place in living memory?
Most US-american families haven’t lived in the US for 100s of years, but they’re still US-americans, not Irish, Spanish, German etc.
No European country has it. And no neither of those laws are more specifically “19th century” than the other, considering they are both much much older than that. Perhaps you should read up on history for a bit before making uninformed blanket statements like that?
Do not do this. American passports are the easiest to exchange for another countries citizenship, but one of the hardest to get.
Anyone born to an American citizen is an American citizen, regardless of where it happens. Most foreign countries don’t grant citizenship based on place of birth the way the US does, so if you go to Afroeurasia expecting to get a dual citizenship for your child, it’s likely to fail, but they would still be an American.
Best we can do is free health care
a lot of countries don’t even do that, many countries reserve that for just their citizens.
They would have to have birth right citizenship for that to work.
Buddy, trust me you really shouldn’t want Americans to become citizens in your country.
Imagine US citizens flying abroad to have anchor babies.
And failing at it because most other countries don’t have birthright citizenship 😂
No need to go overseas, almost all countries with birthright citizenship are in the Americas.
nobody likes immigrants, and that includes other countries
I like immigrants. They’re so much more interesting than most people.
The better term might be “abroad”, rather than “overseas”. Because Jus Soli is a concept that exists mostly in the Americas. So you’d better not cross over the Atlantic or Pacific sea for this plan.
That isn’t the plan you think it is. The US is an outlier in terms of granting birthright citizenship. Most countries - and particularly, most developed countries - do not do this.
Canada, Mexico and a lot of South America countries do this.
And if you believe any of them are safe territory when it comes to what our batshit government might do, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn looking for a buyer.
I have one in Arizona - trade?
I have one in Arizona - trade?
I hope Canada is safe, becauseI live there.
Don’t look too closely at your southern neighbor, it might be alarming.
Obviously all of those are also Nazi countries
It’s actually unique to americas - older countries are less likely to do this.
