Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday January 17 2020, @05:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the taking-the-piss dept.

WSJ runs this story (alternative MSN same text)

HONG KONG—Japanese citizen Midori Nishida was checking in to a flight in Hong Kong in November to visit her parents on Saipan, a U.S. island in the Pacific, when airline staff made an unusual demand. She had to take a pregnancy test if she wanted to board.

Ms. Nishida, 25 years old, was escorted to a public rest room and handed a strip to urinate on.

The test was part of the response of one airline, Hong Kong Express Airways, to immigration concerns in Saipan. The island has become a destination for women intending to give birth on U.S. territory, making their babies eligible for American citizenship. In 2018, more tourists than residents gave birth in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, in which Saipan is the largest island.

Pregnant foreigners aren't barred from entering the U.S., or from giving birth in U.S. territory. But immigration authorities can turn away visitors if they are found to be lying about their purpose of travel, or if they come to the U.S. planning to have a medical procedure, such as giving birth, but can't prove they have the funds to pay for it.

Airlines are required to take back passengers who are denied entry—an incentive to ensure that those who board their flights are likely to be deemed admissible to the U.S.

One would think the birth tourism was reaching crisis levels in Saipan; but TFA has a chart showing 582 births by tourists in 2018.

Heck, looks like even Trump's businesses are happy to oblige if the price is right.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by ikanreed on Friday January 17 2020, @05:29PM (23 children)

    by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @05:29PM (#944611) Journal

    Inasmuch as there's ever been an immigration crisis not specifically caused by war refugees fleeing a blasted hellscape.

    The goal of strict immigration policies is almost never any useful material end, but almost always the fear that somewhere, someday, someone "unworthy" might get some benefit they don't "deserve". Trying to embed that incredibly stupid fear into the language of universal laws is impossible, so you end up with quotas, walls, and concentration camps.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by slinches on Friday January 17 2020, @05:53PM (10 children)

      by slinches (5049) on Friday January 17 2020, @05:53PM (#944624)

      The goal of immigration policies is to know who you are letting into the country (i.e. those who want to be part of our country rather than our enemies) and limiting the flow so that it can be planned for instead of overwhelming social and economic systems to the point of instability.

      You can be pro-immigration while still recognizing how problematic open borders would be.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by ikanreed on Friday January 17 2020, @06:30PM (9 children)

        by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @06:30PM (#944642) Journal

        You could theoretically say that I suppose. But why does the open border between maryland(the richest state in the nation per capita) and west virginia(the poorest) with an income disparity of almost 100% higher incomes, not create that super instability that would socially destroy those states?

        • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Friday January 17 2020, @07:07PM

          by shortscreen (2252) on Friday January 17 2020, @07:07PM (#944669) Journal

          Someone from WV moving to MD isn't going to get a huge boost in standard of living by doing the same job in a different place. There are higher-paying jobs in MD that build up the per capita numbers, but that doesn't create an incentive for people who aren't qualified for those jobs. MD almost certainly has a higher cost of living too.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by slinches on Friday January 17 2020, @07:08PM (7 children)

          by slinches (5049) on Friday January 17 2020, @07:08PM (#944671)

          Because those states (along with 48 others) have agreed to share enough common legal structure and government to allow that. Open borders without a voluntarily agreed to system of governance would be chaos.

          • (Score: 3, Funny) by ikanreed on Friday January 17 2020, @08:25PM (6 children)

            by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @08:25PM (#944701) Journal

            I submit that that is vague enough to be useless.

            • (Score: 2) by slinches on Friday January 17 2020, @08:46PM (5 children)

              by slinches (5049) on Friday January 17 2020, @08:46PM (#944717)

              Okay ... if that's too vague, then so is the whole concept of open borders.

              • (Score: 5, Informative) by ikanreed on Friday January 17 2020, @09:03PM

                by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @09:03PM (#944720) Journal

                It's fairly specific, the laws surrounding excessive and totalitarian policing of people crossing imaginary lines is just as amoral as totalitarian policing within those lines.

                Now, I may have a bit of a convert's zeal here. I wasn't particular interested, specifically, in open borders, until the concentration camps. That's definitely what crossed the line to "oh these people have no limits and need to be stopped and nothing they say is of any value to anyone"

              • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @10:01PM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @10:01PM (#944755)

                Okay ... if that's too vague, then so is the whole concept of open borders.

                Yes. it is. What does "Open borders" mean? The only folks I've ever heard talking about such a thing are those who are against "open borders."

                In the EU and the US, there is freedom of movement between internal states. I imagine that's true in Australia and some other places too. Is that what you mean by "open borders?" No? I don't think you do.

                However, I've *never* heard anyone call for "open" borders between nations. As such, the vagueness stems from the fact that it's a straw man, given that no one actually supports such a thing.

                Have fun knocking it down.

                • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:12AM (2 children)

                  by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:12AM (#944900) Journal

                  However, I've *never* heard anyone call for "open" borders between nations.

                  See also Schengen agreement. Since 1985.
                  Some say Brexit is caused by its consequences.

                  --
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:22AM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:22AM (#944903)

                    See also Schengen agreement. Since 1985.
                    Some say Brexit is caused by its consequences.

                    Gosh. I should have mentioned the EU (which is what the Schengen Agreement was about) in my post.

                    Oh, wait. I did.

                    What's more, the UK is not, and never has been, party to the Schengen Convention [wikipedia.org]. As such, the Schengen Convention is irrelevant to the UK or Brexit.

                    • (Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:38AM

                      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:38AM (#944907) Journal

                      Oh, wait. I did.

                      No, you didn't. If you indeed wanted to mean "countries of Europe are states", based on the fact that each country in Europe is a nation, then your comment is self-contradictory once you wrote

                      However, I've *never* heard anyone call for "open" borders between nations.

                      --
                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @06:08PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @06:08PM (#944628)

      It's to avoid insanely high taxes and property prices matched with hordes of homeless shitting in the streets and leaving drug paraphernalia everywhere. Ie, extreme wealth inequality.

      It is so easy to predict the end result of your favored policies.

      • (Score: 5, Interesting) by ikanreed on Friday January 17 2020, @06:26PM (3 children)

        by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @06:26PM (#944639) Journal

        Things I'm 100% certain of:
        1. You've never read a single goddamn immigration law in your life
        2. You're very good at making predictions
        3. You've never ever ever even once checked if a single prediction you've made turned out to be right.

        Your fucking policies already created hell. We're living in it, restriction after restriction after restriction, quota, fence followed by "virtual wall" followed by wall, having no rights within 100 miles of a border, concentration camps. None of it, not a single goddamn bit of it has done anything but create suffering. There's not a police state totalitarian enough for you psychos to actually be satisfied.

        • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:10PM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:10PM (#944673)

          Those arent my policies. My policy would be open borders, minimal taxes, and government doesnt give out any free shit. Basically government is the biggest gang around, and all they do is put down other gangs.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @09:53PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @09:53PM (#944749)

            In fairness, putting down other gangs is the single most important function of government. If that breaks down you wind up like Somalia, where every two-bit dictator-wannabe with some followers tries to be king of the trash heap. That never ends well for anyone.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 18 2020, @01:21PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 18 2020, @01:21PM (#944951) Journal

              If that breaks down you wind up like Somalia, where every two-bit dictator-wannabe with some followers tries to be king of the trash heap. That never ends well for anyone.

              It ended better for Somalia than the government [wikipedia.org] did.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @06:31PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @06:31PM (#944643)

      Sorry, no. The reason for immigration policy is to maintain sovereignty. Without individual sovereign nations, we start moving towards globalism. Under globalism, there would be no place to run, no place to hide. There's a duality here that's lost on a lot of people. By keeping people out, we preserve a system that makes it possible for people to get out. Some people naively think that breaking down all the borders would give us global Finland. They don't consider that it might give us global North Korea.

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Friday January 17 2020, @07:10PM (1 child)

        by tangomargarine (667) on Friday January 17 2020, @07:10PM (#944674)

        They said "The goal of strict immigration policies".

        The stupidest thing about these immigration debates is that people always seem to think the only options are "nobody gets in" and "give free citizenship, healthcare, and Big Macs to everybody who can hobble across this line in the desert".

        --
        "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
        • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday January 17 2020, @10:17PM

          by ikanreed (3164) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @10:17PM (#944763) Journal

          I mean, to be fair to them, I probbably count as radical. I wouldn't really put myself in the middle or center of the issue. Most middle-ground positions seem to lack any real convictions besides appeasing the "we're being invaded" side without articulating an actual ideology or meaningful goal to support the resulting centrist position. It tends to result in positions like "Enforce the laws we have"(which are mostly horrendously baseless) or "Lets set quotas to some smallish sounding number"

          I'm not fundamentally averse to compromise, conceptually, but it's also not gonna come into the conversation pre-compromised. I want to see a reality based argument for any border-related protection you want to persist.

      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @09:15PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @09:15PM (#944726)

        Under globalism, there would be no place to run, no place to hide.

        Bad for criminals, eh? Especially tax-dodgers, pedophiles, or Republicans in general, and more especially war criminals, like many Americans. Sovereignty seems to be a racket.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:15AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:15AM (#944901) Journal

        Under globalism, there would be no place to run, no place to hide.

        LOL. Because you actually can do it today, right?

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday January 18 2020, @12:00AM (1 child)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday January 18 2020, @12:00AM (#944802) Homepage

      Invasive species are invasive species, war refugees or not. Ruining other habitats is their nature, and recall the tale of the Scorpion and the Frog.

      It is in the best interest of other species worldwide to keep invasive species in their own habitat rather than let them spread indiscriminately wherever the hell they please. For example, the Squat Brown (Co-)Cane Toads (Brownicus Menascis) to the immediate South of America and the Round-Capped Hornbill Seagull (Siegel Hookrhinostacus) accidentally introduced to America from Eurasia.

      • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:04AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:04AM (#944898)

        Always exploring new depths in being an asshole.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @05:44PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @05:44PM (#944618)

    Find a way to blame it on Trump.

  • (Score: 2) by Mojibake Tengu on Friday January 17 2020, @06:02PM (4 children)

    by Mojibake Tengu (8598) on Friday January 17 2020, @06:02PM (#944626) Journal

    ...did they presume her sex?
    Under which legal authority, Hong Kong or United States one?
    Is this even legal under libertarian regime?
    What other meanings of liberty we should expect?
    Saipan itself is just a colony. It ever was.

    --
    Respect Authorities. Know your social status. Woke responsibly.
    • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday January 17 2020, @07:08PM (3 children)

      by tangomargarine (667) on Friday January 17 2020, @07:08PM (#944670)

      By Forcing to Take a Pregnancy Test...did they presume her sex?

      Now you've got me curious--do the "piss on a strip/stick" pregnancy tests work for men? If they test for the presence of some particular hormone that men either don't have at all, or in sufficient quantities to trigger the test, wouldn't it accurately report "not pregnant"?

      Or is it a trinary "yes / no / insufficient data"

      --
      "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
      • (Score: 4, Funny) by kazzie on Friday January 17 2020, @08:00PM (2 children)

        by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @08:00PM (#944693)
        • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @09:38PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @09:38PM (#944740)

          I was expecting you to pull out the reddit guy's story: https://old.reddit.com/r/fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu/comments/12kihx/pregnant_man_rage/c6wyitw/ [reddit.com]

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 21 2020, @12:18PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 21 2020, @12:18PM (#946304)

          OMG!
          They cloned Bash.org!!!!
          Why didn't we get a new article about this??

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by GreatOutdoors on Friday January 17 2020, @06:06PM (10 children)

    by GreatOutdoors (6408) on Friday January 17 2020, @06:06PM (#944627)

    I know this isn't an unbiased crowd, but I do think that the jab at Trump as a personal note in the main heading is a bit out of line. Put a statement there, then express your anti-Trump feelings below where they belong, in the comments section. Reserve the main heading for useful information.

    --
    Yes, I did make a logical argument there. You should post a logical response.
    • (Score: 2) by GreatOutdoors on Friday January 17 2020, @06:10PM

      by GreatOutdoors (6408) on Friday January 17 2020, @06:10PM (#944631)

      Sorry for the mis-type on the name. I can't moderate my own comment, so if another mod can do it, please correct the title to janrinok.

      Thanks.

      --
      Yes, I did make a logical argument there. You should post a logical response.
    • (Score: -1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @06:11PM (3 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @06:11PM (#944632)

      Trump is a civil rights violator, now it has been revealed Sanderrs violates the civil rights of women too:

      Anonymous sources allegedly told CNN Monday that Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders told Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren that a woman can’t beat President Donald Trump in November.

      CNN reports that four people confirmed Sanders’ statement to Warren, including two people Warren allegedly spoke with directly after the meeting and two others familiar with the conversation that took place at Warren’s Washington D.C. apartment in December 2018 before the two senators had officially entered the presidential contest.

      https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/13/anonymous-sources-claim-sanders-told-warren-a-woman-couldnt-win/ [thefederalist.com]

      Violated laws:

      42 U.S. Code § 2000a
      29 CFR § 1604.11
      Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 SEC. 701

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:05PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:05PM (#944665)

        it's predicting what would happen, not barring her from doing anything, you idiot

        and besides, anonymous sources can claim whatever they want but he denies it

        • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:30PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:30PM (#944681)

          It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, or to classify or refer for employment any individual on the basis of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

          As a US Senator, Warren is an employee of all US citizens, including Sanders. Sanders told here she can't win a place in the Whorehouse. He should have encouraged her ("refer for employment") to take the job. Instead he decided to violate her civil rights.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @08:21PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @08:21PM (#944699)

            Sanders is not in charge of who gets the job. the fact that he's competing for the same job didn't tip you off about that?

            I can say I can't fly after jumping off a cliff, it's not because somebody else is stopping me.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Friday January 17 2020, @07:50PM (3 children)

      by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 17 2020, @07:50PM (#944685) Journal

      jab at Trump as a personal note in the main heading

      The main heading doesn't mention Trump. The link in the story does. On my screen, the main heading says:

      Hong Kong Express Airways Sorry for Making Woman Take Pregnancy Test

      However, assuming that you are referring to the link in the story, did you read the associated link? Is it not relevant to the discussion?

      This main story is about people moving to a place administered by the USA in order to ensure that their children automatically qualify for US citizenship when born. The second story does not claim that Trump is personally involved or benefits from what is happening in Miami, but his businesses certainly seem to making the most of the opportunity. That is precisely what the intro to that link says:

      Heck, looks like even Trump's businesses are happy to oblige if the price is right.

      Trump might be blissfully unaware of it - but one would suspect that is not the case.

      Would you prefer that the submitter wrote (not I as you seem to be assuming) 'Businesses owned by a gentleman who happens to have a high position in the US Government'? I don't think that would fool anyone and we could be accused of misquoting the source, which is the DailyBeast. The DailyBeast story also indicates that it is not something that is happening in insignificant numbers in a place remote from the USA. I think that article makes a valid and relevant point, although I can see that some with strong political views might feel it is undeserving.

      Today in one story I am accused of being alt-right supporter and of favouring Trump and the Republicans in my selection of stories, and then here of taking an opposite stance and 'taking a jab at Trump'. I must be doing something right - both sides hate me. :)

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:54PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:54PM (#944688)

        Everyone is obsessed with Trump, it is the best advertising I have ever seen.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:23AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:23AM (#944904)

        I must be doing something right - both sides hate me. :)

        Yes, love, you're doing just fine.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @09:04PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @09:04PM (#945084)

        I'm gonna need a source on someone accusing you of being an alt-right supporter. Aristarchus doesn't count.

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:21AM

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 18 2020, @07:21AM (#944902) Journal

      I know this isn't an unbiased crowd, but I do think that the jab at Trump as a personal note in the main heading is a bit out of line.

      Really? Why?
      Look, I wasn't aware that birth tourism is a thing until I stumbled over TFA. I googled and the first result page contained the link. And I thought that has to be some form of hypocrisy if rich russians are welcomed while mid-class chinese are not.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
  • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Friday January 17 2020, @07:19PM (1 child)

    by shortscreen (2252) on Friday January 17 2020, @07:19PM (#944679) Journal

    Did she appear to be pregnant while denying it? Or was she planning to be there for that long that she would have been able to progress from a state of not being obviously pregnant to giving birth?

    Besides, aren't Americans dropping anchor babies all over their military bases in Japan? I heard from someone that was born there (in the '50s) that they had the option to claim Japanese citizenship until a certain age (18 or 21 I guess).

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:53PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 17 2020, @07:53PM (#944686)

      Besides, aren't Americans dropping anchor babies all over their military bases in Japan? I heard from someone that was born there (in the '50s) that they had the option to claim Japanese citizenship until a certain age (18 or 21 I guess).

      I suppose something like this could have been true in 1950 because Japan was under allied occupation at the time and the rules may have been different.

      However, a person born to American parents in Japan today will most definitely not be a Japanese citizen.

(1)