California mandates gender-neutral toy aisles for large retailers

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Aries

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
5,538
Reaction score
8,098
Location
Sapulpa
The very first Sentence of the very first paragraph is continuously ignored. There in lies the problem and let me post it for you Manny tend to not understand it

A person born in the United States who is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States is a U.S.

Pick a foreign nationality and they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States because they are not citizens. There the words are twisted by Democrats and people have believed the big lie.

Congress had to amend the constitution just so that freed blacks would be considered citizens. Congress even had to vote in the 1930s to make Indians American citizens. When did congress vote to make anybody that crosses our border that pops out a child or squats here a citizen? Never. It never happened.
Not sure I'm following you... anyone who is not a citizen is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States? mmmmm.... that doesn't sound right.

"subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" eliminates the children of foreign diplomats. Not sure what blacks and native Americans has to do with anything.

But I'll let you challenge it in court. We have exceeded my interest in debating it.
 

xseler

These are not the firearms you're looking for.
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
6,739
Reaction score
11,632
Location
Moore, OK
Hmmmm, I wonder what will happen when they merchandise GI Joe with the Kung-Fu grip next to Malibu Barbie...........

(Over the intercom) --- "Clean up on aisle #76, again."


:anyone:
 

Seadog

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
5,664
Reaction score
6,971
Location
Boondocks
Not sure I'm following you... anyone who is not a citizen is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States? mmmmm.... that doesn't sound right.

"subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" eliminates the children of foreign diplomats. Not sure what blacks and native Americans has to do with anything.

But I'll let you challenge it in court. We have exceeded my interest in debating it.
You are not understanding the meaning of the word. So we will agree to disagree
 

RugersGR8

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jun 20, 2005
Messages
32,285
Reaction score
55,022
Location
NW OK
1633968146445.jpeg
 

mavs

Sharpshooter
Special Hen Banned
Joined
Jun 5, 2021
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
1,013
Location
Texas
Just because they are issuing birth certificates does not mean they are Americans. Paper purposes it makes it look like it and they are treated like it. If you tell a lie over and over it doesn’t make it true and that is the case with this. Millions of people are being labeled as Americans when they are not.
Whether or not you like it, if a person is born in the US and subject to it's jurisdiction is a U.S. Citizen.

It should be changed, and Trump was for changing it, but it was not changed and therefore remains the law of the land.
 

Seadog

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
5,664
Reaction score
6,971
Location
Boondocks
Whether or not you like it, if a person is born in the US and subject to it's jurisdiction is a U.S. Citizen.

It should be changed, and Trump was for changing it, but it was not changed and therefore remains the law of the land.
Trump was trying to enforce existing law that is ignored. Has been ignored so long that people actually believe it to be true. A typical Democrat tactic.

This is why it is so important to have constitutional judges instead of progressive liberal Democrat judges that do not uphold the law.

A perfect example is in California. Early 2000s. California voted numerous times against legalizing gay marriage. Shocker that it could pass even in Liberal California. It was not law and it was still illegal. And then a progressive liberal judge started marrying gay people anyways. And then it continued from there.

This is another example of that same exact thing. It is illegal but people are continuing to do it. And it has been going on so long that people actually believe it to be true and legal. But it is not.

You are correct I do not like it and it is continuing. Nonetheless it’s still illegal
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom