General Discussion

Choose Your Own Topic

Read 992 times

Trinity

  • *****
  • 28422 Posts
    • View Profile
Anchor baby fallacy?
« on: August 25, 2017, 05:05:50 pm »
Is 'anchor baby' a fallacy? I've seen a video where some journalist asks for another term to be used in place of 'anchor baby'. If someone continues to use 'anchor baby', would that be fallacious?
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. - Psalm 19:1

1

lucious

  • ***
  • 4633 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2017, 03:54:59 am »
Never heard of this, what on Earth is it?

2

Relativist

  • ***
  • 3294 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2017, 12:47:41 pm »
I believe Trinity is referring to the concept of non-citizens coming to the United States, and giving birth to a baby while here.  According to the Constitution (14th amendment), anyone born in the U.S. is a citizen.

Given that Constitutional rule, there is at least the possibility that people come here (illegally, or legally) in order to have a U.S. citizen baby. This baby is then an "anchor."  If the non-citizen parents would like to live in the U.S., they can appeal to the fact that their baby has a constitutional right to stay, coupled with the sentiment against splitting up the family.

I don't see that the term "fallacy" applies because it is at least a theoretical possibility, and it entails no contradictions. The real issues include: how often does this occur? what problems (if any) does this cause? If it's truly a problem, what can we do about it?
« Last Edit: August 26, 2017, 08:46:47 pm by Relativist »

3

bdsimon

  • ****
  • 7047 Posts
  • δοῦλος
    • View Profile
Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2017, 06:29:43 am »
Is 'anchor baby' a fallacy? I've seen a video where some journalist asks for another term to be used in place of 'anchor baby'. If someone continues to use 'anchor baby', would that be fallacious?
I'm voting no.
Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.

4

bskeptic

  • ****
  • 8288 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« Reply #4 on: September 01, 2017, 07:41:17 am »
For continuing to use a term that someone dislikes?-- that doesn't sound like a fallacy, unless you have a good argument that the term is very misleading and inaccurate. If the term fairly represents the behavior of some people, then it can hardly be called a "fallacy".

If there was an argument given against the use of the term...

5

SPF

  • ***
  • 1963 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« Reply #5 on: September 01, 2017, 07:52:09 am »
It sounds to me like a perfectly valid term that refers to a specific situation.  I think the issue is that it's just become politically incorrect. 
"It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln

6

bskeptic

  • ****
  • 8288 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« Reply #6 on: September 01, 2017, 08:08:49 am »
Yeah-- maybe some people don't like such a "judgemental" "negative" term, and want to come up with a different spin for it. So try to take away the stigma from what is terrible behaviour.

7

Trinity

  • *****
  • 28422 Posts
    • View Profile
Re: Anchor baby fallacy?
« Reply #7 on: September 01, 2017, 08:15:50 am »
Thanks for the comments. I suppose the term is 'impolite' at best, because it doesn't seem to be fallacious.

Bskeptic,

I don't remember any argument given against the use of the term, what I remember is that the journalist objected and suggested some other term to be used instead.
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. - Psalm 19:1