EXAM 2.4 (ARTICLE IV: Citizenship)

Write a concurring opinion and dissenting opinion for the motion.

REPLACE JUS SANGUINIS WITH JUS SOLI.

Article IV, Section 2.

Natural-born citizens are those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. Those who elect Philippine citizenship in accordance with paragraph (3), Section 1 hereof shall be deemed natural-born citizens.

Jus sanguinis (Latin for “right of blood”) is a social policy by which nationality or citizenship is not determined by place of birth, but by having an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state.
It contrasts with jus soli (Latin for “right of soil”).

Jus soli (Latin for “right of the soil” or, somewhat figuratively, “right of the territory”), or birthright citizenship, is a right by which nationality or citizenship can be recognised to any individual born in the territory of the related state.

Concurring opinion:

1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.

Dissenting opinion:

1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

Advertisements

44 Responses

  1. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that having the blood of your of parents already makes you a Filipino in itself. You have the traits of a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    The rationale is flawed because having traits of a Filipino does not make you act like a Filipino.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    Wherever you are in the world, you will always adopt to the environment in which you are in. You will not act what you do not see everyday. Your attitude will always be like a Filipino if you don’t see firsthand. Your parents cannot teach you all about being a Filipino. May be some traits but not all.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that having the blood of your of parents already makes you a Filipino in itself. You have the traits of a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    The rationale is correct because you are carrying the traits of a Filipino. Even if you were born outside of the Philippine territory, you will still be a Filipino because you also have the characteristics and traits of being a Filipino. You will look like a Filipino whether you like it or not.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    Citizenship should also be determined by jus sanguinis because you have the physical characteristics of a Filipino. You will also learn the ways of a Filipino through your parents. Even if you try to hide your Filipino traits, you will still unconsciously reveal it.

  2. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    -Traits are passed from generation to generation. The child inherits the traits of their parents. It is in the blood, so to speak. Filipinos are known for many traits like hospitality and respect. If these traits are seen in one person that everyone knows is the distinguishing trait of a Filipino, then you are known to be a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    -Even if your parents are Filipinos, it does not follow that you can be called a Filipino too. A person can be raised in other places can adapt the traits of that place instead of the traits of his bloodline. If you act as a different person, you cannot be another at the same time. Difference between a Filipino and a foreigner can be said by how they act because there are acts and traits that a Filipino possess.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.
    -One can be called a citizen if he knows the ways and actions of the environment he is around. You cannot be one if you do not know about it. Therefore, a person who is raised in the place knows the place and can truly a part of it. If a person of other blood is raised in the Philippines for a long time he will know how to be a true Filipino and be able to display traits and actions that is truly a mark of a Filipino. It does not matter what his ancestry is as long as he knows the ways to be a part of the community.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    -Traits are passed from generation to generation. The child inherits the traits of their parents. It is in the blood, so to speak. Filipinos are known for many traits like hospitality and respect. If these traits are seen in one person that everyone knows is the distinguishing trait of a Filipino, then you are known to be a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    -There are things that can be inherited by the children from their parents. Facial features, body build and skin color are some of the things that can be inherited. This cannot be avoided because it is predetermined from the start. These genetic features are the ones that distinguish a Filipino from other races. You are called a Filipino because no matter what changes you do, the build of your body is known to be unique to the Filipino.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    -Genetic makeups are passed from generation to generation. There will be some similarities of the parent to the child. This will mean that he is descended from this line and proves that he has the characteristics of that ancestry. If you look the same as your parents, it means that you must be the same as your parents and therefore of the same citizenship.

  3. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    >> Jus Sanguinis can make one person a filipino / a natural born filipino citizen by means of your ancestors wherein it has been traced that they possess a true blood of being a filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    >> We really all know that theres no such thing as a “pure blooded filipino” because ever since the history is concerned since the very very beginning “migration” process is the issue where we all came from different roots and just migrated from one place to another since the time of Egyptian period where Kings and Pharoahs from some country had let their other people migrated from different places. So no one can really tell about their history of their ancestors.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus Soli Justify the proposal.

    >> Replacing Jus Sanguinis with Jus Soli is a possible thing to do since according to psychology that a persons traits depends on the way he/she lives and environment is one of the great factors to consider on why does a person acts that way. relating it to our country, filipino values and antics can be adopted by the person who was born and raised here in the Philippines therefore no discrimination can occur since the person who grew up here already adopted the values of the filipinos and he can go along with other filipinos.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    >> >> Jus Sanguinis can make one person a filipino / a natural born filipino citizen by means of your ancestors wherein it has been traced that they possess a true blood of being a filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    >> The rationale is correct because sinply ever since, we already inherited the traits of being a filipino which makes us unique and separates us from the rest.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    >>Hhaving our ancestors who is a citizen of the state has already their own features and trademarks which makes and describes them as a pure and fully pinoy. Characteristics and attitudes of our ancestors really makes us unique from every person around the world wherein we can really say that were proud to be pinoy.

  4. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    Coming from Filipino parent/s, it would surely mean that a person have traces, if not pure Filipino blood . when an apple tree bears fruit, it produces apples not oranges. Same goes with the blood.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    Environment is also a factor in determining a person’s citizenship. People know how to adapt that is why blood should not be the sole reason in determining citizenship.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.

    I believe that considering both the blood of the person and the longevity of his stay in a place would be better. It is because this depends on what the situation is.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    Coming from Filipino parent/s, it would surely mean that a person have traces, if not pure Filipino blood . when an apple tree bears fruit, it produces apples not oranges. Same goes with the blood.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    Having the Filipino blood, characteristics of being one wouldn’t be eradicated. Filipinos abroad have common attitudes with those who stay in the country.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    Citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state because somehow it shows loyalty to the blood.

  5. Concurring Opinion:

    Jus sanguinis is replaced by jus soli to help those who are born in the Philippines but not of Filipino parents acquire Filipino Citizenship without having to go through troublesome paperwork.

    It is indeed common for former foreigners to change their citizenship to Filipino and produce offsprings in the Philippines.

    However, some foreigners only visit our country for sightseeing and the baby only happens to be born here. Back in their country having multiple citizenships is not permitted. They would need to stay in the Philippines for a little longer for paperwork to change their child’s citizenship. Furthermore they will have problems with the embassy. This is very uncomforable, and highly inefficient.

    Dissenting Opinion:

    Jus sanguinis is replaced by jus soli to help those who are born in the Philippines but not of Filipino parents acquire Filipino Citizenship without having to go through troublesome paperwork.

    It is indeed common for former foreigners to change their citizenship to Filipino and produce offsprings in the Philippines. This makes it easier for foreigners to come live in the Philippines. These kinds of situations are good for tourism. Our country will also project a welcoming vibe towards those who plan to visit our country.

    Foreigners coming to live here is actually a good sign. It is a representation that the Philippines is comfortable place to live in; otherwise, they would not like their children to be born here. Since there are no serious complications regarding this matter, this law should be retained as it is.

  6. A.
    Jus Sanguinis states that your traits passed on to you by your parents, including their citizenship. As long as you belong to a bloodline of an actual Filipino, you become a Filipino Citizen.

    This provision is flawed because in a way, it discriminates those who have migrated from other countries. They are living in this country but this provision would end up marginalizing them, treating them as ‘alien’ to our local life. The same could be said to those born outside the country. They would end up as filipino citizens even though they do not know the culture and the way of living in their own country, this may end up degrading the image of the country, having citizens that know nothing about their own country.

    One should be considered as a citizen as long as he is able adapt to life in the country. As long as a person chooses the country he resides in, even if he/she is a foreigner, he should be given equal rights that those who are native to the country enjoy.

    B.
    Jus Sanguinis states that your traits passed on to you by your parents, including their citizenship. As long as you belong to a bloodline of an actual Filipino, you become a Filipino Citizen.

    There are traits that are only found in Filipinos. You cannot deny the fact that a foreigner is not native to our country, that he does not share any connection to the country he resides in.

    It is justifiable to shift to Jus Sanguinis because it provides an opportunity to those born outside the country. It enables those who are born outside the country to be able to tap into their ‘roots’ as Filipinos. We have traits that truly say that we are Filipino, traits that we have gained through genetics.

  7. A.
    Having the blood of a Filipino make a person a Filipino. One cannot say he/she is not a Filipino if he/she came from a true Filipino.
    Not knowing how a Filipino lives could not justify someone to say he/she is a Filipino even if he/she has a blood of a Filipino.
    A person who lived in a place for a very long time and knows the ways and values on the place may consider himself/herself a citizen of the place.
    B.
    Having the blood of a Filipino make a person a Filipino. One cannot say he/she is not a Filipino if he/she came from a true Filipino.
    Having a blood of a Filipino will make you a Filipino because you will most likely acquire the traits of a Filipino from your parent who is a Filipino.
    A person with a Filipino blood will surely live with Filipino traits because it is his/her parent that will teach him/her what a Filipino is.

  8. CONCURRING OPINION

    State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that your citizenship is determined by your ancestral roots.

    Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    – A rather appropriate term for the rationale is ANCESTRY rather than CITIZENSHIP. It is ancestry that is defined by your bloodline. This misconception results in the rationale being flawed.

    Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    – Being a Filipino citizen must not be limited to the trace of Filipino blood you have. A citizen means a civilian as distinguished from a specialized servant of the state. As long as he/she knows how to be a part of the community, he/she is entitled to be Filipino citizen.

    DISSENTING OPINION

    State the rationale (reason for being) of the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that your citizenship is determined by your ancestral roots.

    Explain why the rationale is correct.
    – By having Filipino blood, you inherit specific traits which make you a true Filipino.

    Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    – A person of Filipino blood will surely acquire the characteristics and traits of Filipino. Those born outside the country or with Filipino ancestry would be also given the chance to tap into their inner Filipino-self.

  9. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that the nationality of an individual is not determined by the place of his/her birth. Rather, it’s determined by the nationality of his/her ancestor.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    The rationale is flawed because more often than not, a person born in another country doesn’t embrace his/her nationality. Besides, how can an individual embrace a nationality which is foreign to him/her? Also, the environment is one of the determinants of a person’s nationality.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.

    Jus soli is a right by which nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individual born in the territory of the related state. A person can be considered a citizen by the state where he/she was born because he/she will undoubtedly adopt their traits.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that the nationality of an individual is not determined by the place of his/her birth. Rather, it’s determined by the nationality of his/her ancestor.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    The rationale is correct because Filipino blood runs through your veins; therefore, you should be considered a Filipino no matter where you are born.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    Citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state because no matter how much one tries to deny and hide it, one will still carry the traits of his ancestors’ homeland.

  10. 1. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    Jus Sanguinis states that, you are a Filipino if your parents are of Filipino blood
    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    There is no such thing as pure Filipino by blood. If this is the case, then most Filipinos would not be considered to be a pure Filipino by blood since many cultures have already influenced our blood line as a Filipino
    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    Jus Sanguinis can be replaced by Jus Soli. Basing on the genetical structure of a person which is carried by the blood, does not guarantee that the person can live in the culture of a certain society. The person can fully adjust on its environment and other factors that can affect his behavior and way of thinking.
    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    Jus Sanguinis states that, you are a Filipino if your parents are of Filipino blood
    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    Having Filipino blood, may guarantee the same Filipino culture inside since we cannot hide it because it will always be evident in our system.
    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    Having an ancestor of the state means that this ancestor has pure Filipino blood since he is one of the pioneers of the Filipino culture

  11. Concurring Opinion

    1.) Jus sanguinis states that whoever your root is, for as long is he/she, they/them are Filipinos, then basically, that makes you a Filipino. Place of birth is not an issue.

    2.) A citizen of Filipino who is born abroad and grows up there doesn’t make him/her a full blooded Filipino. What I am trying to say is that the place of birth and living is a great factor that influences our Filipino being.

    3.) Replacing Jus Soli with Jus Sanguinis will simpler things in determining who is to be considered as Filipino.

    Dissenting Opinion

    1.) Jus sanguinis states that whoever your root is, for as long is he/she, they/them are Filipinos, then basically, that makes you a Filipino. Place of birth is not an issue.

    2.) The rationale is very correct because we should consider anyone, having the roots of a Filipino, wherever he/she is born, to be a Filipino. More often than not, these people are the ones who bring pride for our country.

    3.) Citizenship should be determined according to ancestors because that is the root where you came from. Whether you deny it or not, you are genetically a Filipino because you will acquire the physical appearance and other characteristics of a Filipino.

  12. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    Jus sanguinis, a person becomes a natural-born citizen of the Philippines only if his/her parents are citizens on the Philippines.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    The rationale is flawed due to the fact that if one of the parents or both were only converted to being a Filipino, it still makes you a natural-born citizen of the Philippines.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    If Jus soli will be replacing Jus sanguinis then fewer issues will arise. As long as one is born in the land of the Philippines then you are a Filipino. With this a clear basis will be present and no talk shall be needed.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    Jus sanguinis, a person becomes a natural-born citizen of the Philippines only if his/her parents are citizens on the Philippines

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    The rationale is correct due to the fact that you are a Filipino as long as Filipino blood is gushing in your veins. Even if babies of foreigner were born in the Philippines, they wouldn’t be Filipinos and they keep the Citizenship of their parents.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    The citizenship of a person should be determined by his/her ancestor so that he/she would retain the pride of her parents as a citizen of their country. People should be proud of the blood that is gushing in their veins. This would keep them unique; traits of their parents will be shown thus traits of the country will be shown to all the people of the world.

  13. Concurring opinion:

    Jus Sanguinis is citizenship based on blood line, a social policy by which nationality,is not determined by the place of birth.

    Based from history, we Filipinos came from mixed nationality of travellers who came to settle in our country. And so there is no one root that binds us really for most of our original ancestors are migrators that came to treat Philippines as their home. Citizenship is having to say you belong somewhere, a place that you call home and your loyalty remains. A place where you developed love by years of living, a place that you know well, and you’ll certainly defend as your own. Having a Filipino bloodline would never be enough to overcome the love that you have developed if you grew in a different place.

    Replacing Jus Sanguinis with Jus Soli will be favorable for people with Filipino bloodlines living in a different country. It gives them the freedom to stay and become citizens of the country where they found comfort and developed love, over being obliged to become a citizen of our country without love for the country and knowledge in our way of living. Being a citizen is more than taxes and benefits, it is a responsibility we willingly carry for the betterment of our country, our home, a place we LIVE IN and BORN IN.

    Dissenting opinion:

    Jus Sanguinis is citizenship based on blood line, a social policy by which nationality,is not determined by the place of birth.

    Blood is thicker than water. Characters are explained by science by looking into your dna, something you inherit by bloodline. Citizenship is something inherited from your parents. Filipino ways are so wonderful that no citizen would regret to pass it to their children even when they are away from the country.

    Just like a large family, our relatives that grew away from us never made separation a reason for us not to call them part of the family, we would never treat them different even if we never grew beside them. The same concept applies in jus sanguinis, we are like a big family, some instances makes us grow separately but we never treated ourselves different from one another.

  14. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that having parents with the blood of a Filipino makes you a Filipino as well. Place of birth or any other factor do not affect your citizenship.
    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    The rationale is flawed because being Filipino and acting like one is different than having just the blood of one.
    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    Environment is a huge factor in one’s attitude. Even if your parents have blood of a Filipino, it doesn’t justify that you will act like one until you experience interacting with a Filipino first hand.
    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that having parents with the blood of a Filipino makes you a Filipino as well. Place of birth or any other factor do not affect your citizenship.
    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    Having blood as a factor, this rationale is correct because you will always look like a Filipino, even if you like it or not. You acquire traits of a Filipino through your blood.
    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    Citizenship should be ancestral because even if you hide it, being a child of a citizen of a certain state will always and forever be part of your being. Attitude and traits shall be taught by the parents who will eventually make them true citizens of that state.

  15. A. Concurring Opinion
    Jus Sanguinis states that the citizen of a person is determined by the bloodline of his/her ancestors. If his/her ancestors were born Filipino, therefore, that person is also a Filipino.

    The rationale is flawed because some of us might have parents who are mixed nationality. Also, many Filipinos nowadays migrate to other countries which they think that are more progressive than the Philippines. Filipinos who migrate were then influenced by culture of other countries. What influences a person is a great factor in determining his/her nationality.

    I think that a person should be given the citizenship when he/she learns to live by the ways of the Filipinos. Also, when one learns to love the culture and considering the longevity of his/her stay in this country, he/she should be given the right to citizenship.

    B. Dissenting Opinion
    Jus Sanguinis states that the citizen of a person is determined by the bloodline of his/her ancestors. If his/her ancestors were born Filipino, therefore, that person is also a Filipino.

    The rationale is correct because when a person is born by a Filipino, he/she would then be carrying the traits and characteristics of a Filipino which would separate him/her from other nationality.

    One should be given the citizenship considering Jus Sanguinis. As we say, once a Filipino, always a Filipino. Once that you carry a trait or characteristic of being a Filipino, you would always be a Filipino.

  16. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The Jus sanguinis states that having an ancestor that is a natural born citizen of the state will grant you the citizenship of the state. The ancestor should have the pure blood of a Filipino. The place of birth is not a factor in Jus sanguinis.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    – Having parents that are both filipino does not mean that you are really a filippino. A person can be a Jus sanguinis but if you are raised on other country, you might have different traits and beliefs. Having a filipino blood is not enough to be called a filipino because the person might have different characteristics and traits.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    – Replacing the jus sanguinis by jus soli can lessen the confusion. If the person is born on the soil of the Philippines, then he is filipino. He does not need any proof of having ancestors that are filipino to be one.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The Jus sanguinis states that having an ancestor that is a natural born citizen of the state will grant you the citizenship of the state. The ancestor should have the pure blood of a Filipino. The place of birth is not a factor in Jus sanguinis.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    – Having parents that are filipino makes you a filipino. The person will have the physical characteristics of a filipino. This will make him unique to other races and will make the person recognizable as filipino.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    – Being raised as a filipino by your parents will give you a personality of a filipino. You will also have physical attributes of a filipino. Thus making you unique to other races.

  17. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    -The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that the nationality of an individual is determined by the nationality of his/her ancestor. It is not determined by the place of his/her birth.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    -The rationale is flawed because a person born in another country doesn’t always embrace his nationality. A Filipino citizen who is born abroad and grows up there doesn’t make him a full blooded Filipino. The place of birth is a great factor that influences our Filipino being.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.

    -A person who lived in a country for a very long time and knows the culture of the place then he may consider himself a citizen of that country. Being a Filipino citizen must not be limited to the trace of Filipino blood you have.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    -The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that the nationality of an individual is determined by the nationality of his/her ancestor. It is not determined by the place of his/her birth.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    -The rationale is correct because someone having the roots of a Filipino should always be considered a Filipino regardless of where he is born.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    -There will be some similarities of the parent to the child in their genes. This means that he is descended from this line and proves that he has the traits of that lineage. Citizenship should also be determined by jus sanguinis because you have the physical characteristics of a Filipino.

  18. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that you have the blood of your of parents which already makes you a Filipino in itself. It follows that you have the traits that distinguish a Filipino from other citizens, making you a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    -Traits are not the only factor that makes you a Filipino. Actions, words, outlook in life are also some parts of it. But these factors can be affected by the environment. This means that the wrong environment may prevent you from being a Filipino.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    – Being a Filipino is not that easy. Some traditions can be passed on to you but still won’t completely make you a Filipino. There will always be some left that have not been taught.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that you have the blood of your of parents which already makes you a Filipino in itself. It follows that you have the traits that distinguish a Filipino from other citizens, making you a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    – The very first thing that can distinguish a Filipino all over the world are the physical attributes. Being born from a Filipino couple, such features will always be evident.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    – Citizenship should also be determined by jus sanguinis because you have the physical characteristics of a Filipino. The Filipino culture is instilled in Filipino citizens because its what makes them completely Filipino.Filipino mannerisms will surely be evident even if not passed on since some personalities of parents are passed on to he children.

  19. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    -it states that if ur a natural born filipino you will acquire your traits from your parents and they should be a filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    -the rationale is flawed because not all traits are aquired by the child and not just traits are proofs of becoming a natural born filipino.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    -a person who lived in other countries for too long will have different traits from a filipino and thus may not be considered a filipino citizen.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    -it states that if ur a natural born filipino you will aquire your traits from your parents and they should be a filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    -the rationale is correct because having the traits of your parents will distinguish you from any other nationality.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    –having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state will guide you on what a citizen of the state should be and what kind of citizen you should be.

  20. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.

    The rationale behind Jus sanguinis is that your citizenship is determined by your ancestry. You could say that their citizenship is passed on to you.

    This rationale is flawed, especially today, because people can easily travel to other countries. The possibility exists where your parents are a resident of one country while they are born from another country.

    The proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli may indeed be the proper decision to make. Presently the world’s borders are easily crossed and the line between nations is becoming thinner and thinner. It is only natural that laws adapt to the current situation, or else they become obsolete and inapporpriate.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    The rationale behind Jus sanguinis is that your citizenship is determined by your ancestry. You could say that their citizenship is passed on to you.

    In a world where one can easily travel from country to country, having who you really are and where you really belong to clearly defined becomes increasingly important. Having a clear guideline on your citizenship based on who your parents are is the proper course of action.

    By having the citizenship of your ancestor be the determining factor of your citizenship at birth, the conflict which may arise from being born on a different place by chance is avoided. As stated above, it is so very easy to travel to different countries and being born on a foreign land could present big problem concerning citizenship.

  21. A. Concurring Opinion

    The rationale behind the Jus sanguinis is that the nationality is not determined by the place of birth but the nationality of the ancestors. In jus soli, on the other hand determines the nationality by the place of birth.

    The rationale is flawed for people who are not really born in that country doesn’t clearly understand what the culture of that place is. They may have some insights but experiencing it is different. A person’s nationality is also determined by the environment that he/she grew up in.

    It is much better if the person is given the chance to choose his/her citizenship depending on the ancestry line and the place of birth. At a certain age they should choose what citizenship they should have depending on their comfort zone.

    B. Dissenting Opinion

    The rationale behind the Jus sanguinis is that the nationality is not determined by the place of birth but the nationality of the ancestors. In jus soli, on the other hand determines the nationality by the place of birth.

    People with Filipino ancestors will manifest Filipino traits as well. Their physical features, traditions and religious background. They have adopted the Filipino culture in their up bringing.

    It should remain Jus sanguinis so that other Filipinos who are born in other countries still can be Filipino citizens. They can be given the chance to experience the culture of Philippines.

  22. Concurring opinion:

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is determined by the ancestry of a person. It believed that the citizenship is hereditary in the sense that our traits and qualities are passed on thus, qualifying them to be Filipinos as well.

    It becomes flawed because it is really difficult to say that you are really a Filipino thorough your mind and not by heart. The environment would also be a factor where a person lives in, because he/she might be influenced by different qualities and traits which is sometime not acceptable in our country.

    Having a proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli will make things easier and would give more freedom to those people born in different countries with Filipino parents.

    Dissenting opinion:

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is determined by the ancestry of a person. It believed that the citizenship is hereditary in the sense that our traits and qualities are passed on thus, qualifying them to be Filipinos as well.

    As we all know, Filipino parents are very influential to their children. They make sure that their child experiences the Filipino culture in terms of food, language and even history.

    The citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state in such a way that a person will always have a trace of being a Filipino through their parents which will outshine them from other races. One cannot hide from his/her ancestral past; no matter where you came from as long as you have a Filipino ancestry you will always be considered as a Filipino.

  23. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    – It states that if your parents are Filipino. Then you were born having the traits of a true Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    – It is flawed because not just traits are proofs of becoming a true filipino because some of the traits are not acquired by the new born filipino.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.

    – It can lessen the confusion by replacing the jus sanguinis by jus soli. If the person is born in the Philippines, then that person is a filipino.

    Dissenting Opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    – It states that if your parents are Filipino. Then you were born having the traits of a true Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    – It is correct because having a traits of a Filipino makes you a true blooded Filipino.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    – There will be some similarities of the parent to the child in their genes. This means that he is descended from this line and proves that he has the traits of that lineage. Citizenship should also be determined by jus sanguinis because you have the physical characteristics of a Filipino.

  24. A. Concurring Opinion

    The rationale behind the doctrine of Jus Sanguinis is that having the blood of your of parents makes you already a Filipino and that you have the traits of being a Filipino. It is flawed because it does not imply that if you have the traits and blood of a Filipino you act like a Filipino and that you would do everything to bring glory to the Philippines. I can propose to replace Jus Sanguinis with Jus Soli. People adapt to their environment. Therefore, the citizenship of the person should be determined to where that person was born.

    B. Dissenting Opinion

    The rationale behind the doctrine of Jus Sanguinis is that having the blood of your of parents makes you already a Filipino and that you have the traits of being a Filipino. The rationale is correct because no matter where you were given birth you will still carry the traits of your parents. You will still be looking like a Filipino even if you were born in the United States as long as your parents are Filipino also.

  25. A. Concurring Opinion

    The rationale of the doctrine Jus Sanguinis is that by having born by both Filipino parents, you yourself is a true blood Filipino.

    The rationale is flawed because even if you are a true blooded Filipino, it doesn’t make you a true one if you act differently.

    Replacing Jus Sanguinis by Jus Soli is a possibility. As environment plays a big role in influencing on how a person would act. Since the Philippines is a Christian country and gives importance to values. It won’t matter if others are born in the Philippines if they act like Filipinos.

    B. Dissenting Opinion

    The rationale for Jus Sanguinis is determined by the ancestry of the people. If our ancestors were to be true blooded Filipinos, it would manifest in us in our physical features and actions.

    Filipinos value many things, considering that if we are born as a true blooded Filipino, we value the same things and we consider everything we value important and dear to us.

    It should remain Jus Sanguinis as it allows people to discern that if you are a natural born citizen then you are a Filipino. And with this, even other Filipinos who are born in other countries still has the chance to explore the culture in the Philippines.

  26. A. Concurring
    The rationale for Jus Sanguinis is that the nationality is determined by blood or who has ancestors who are citizens of the state.
    The rationale is flawed because there are Filipinos by blood that doesn’t care about the Filipino culture, when they are in the Philippines they act as western people or whatever. While those who are Filipino by land care about the culture and it helps us to acquire full Filipino citizenship. I believe that jus solis must be the basis of our citizenship we who are born in this land have the right to be a citizen.

    B. dissenting
    The rationale for Jus Sanguinis is that the nationality is determined by blood or who has ancestors who are citizens of the state.

    The rationale is correct because every natural born Filipino citizen has the Filipino blood and traits and he will have this forever. I believe that we should not base the citizenship by the jus solis doctrine alone. We are Filipinos in blood.

  27. A. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    > The doctrine of Jus Sanguinis makes a person a natural born Filipino. If it is traced that he or she has ancestors of Filipino blood then, you are truly a Filipino by this doctrine.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    > The rationale is flawed for blood or race is not the only factor for determination of citizenship. Other factors maybe considered like, the place of birth and environment you grew up. (Considering Filipinos who migrated and born outside the country)

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus Soli Justify the proposal.
    >The proposal of the replacement of Jus Sanguinis with Jus Soli is possible. For having an ancestor which is a Filipino, may not be the only basis to determine your citizenship. The place of birth may be considered for its environment can tell who a person is and what citizenship he/she belongs to. Ancestry may not be considered anymore if he/she knows how to be one with the society around him/her. One may be called a citizen if he/she is used to the ways and actions of the environment he/she is around.

    B. Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    > The doctrine of Jus Sanguinis makes a person a natural born Filipino. If it is traced that he or she has ancestors of Filipino blood then, you are truly a Filipino by this doctrine.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    >The rationale is correct because we inherited the traits of our Filipino ancestors which make us different from others. Thus, making us Filipinos as well.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    >Citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is citizen of the state for they have traits and attributes that make them as Filipinos. These trademarks are passed unto generations that define their citizenship as Filipinos.

  28. A. Concurring Opinion:

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus Sanguinis is determined by blood relation. If your both parents are Filipino, you yourself are a true blood Filipino because you have the traits of a Filipino.

    It is flawed because citizenship should not be determined by blood. How can you be a citizen of the Philippines when you are born and currently living on another country? Place of birth and the environment should also take in consideration in determining the citizenship of a person. We are Filipinos not just because of our blood and traits but also because of our cultural inheritances.

    Replacing Jus Sanguinis with Jus soli is a good idea. Environment plays a vital part in honing ones personality. We cannot judge ones character by the way he/she looks, or by their bloodline, we judge a character t by their deeds. It doesn’t matter if you are not Filipino by blood but if but if you act like Filipino then you are a Filipino.

    B. Dissenting Opinion:

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus Sanguinis is determined by blood relation. If your both parents are Filipino, you yourself are a true blood Filipino because you have the traits of a Filipino.

    Every person values his/her cultural inheritance very highly, that is why the parents even if they are away from their home county tries to influence their children with the cultural inheritance of their mother land; letting them experience what is like to be in their home country.

    The citizenship should be determined by Jus Sanguinis. This will help a person to know his true lineage, thus learning where his/her traits have come from.

  29. Replace Jus Sanguins with Jus Soli.

    A. Concurring opinion:

    There are two principes which dictates the acquisition of citizenship by birth. Blood relationship is the basis for the Jus Sangunis principle while place of birth for Jus Soli. In the Philippines, the predominating principle is jus sanguinis where in the natural born citizens are determined by blood.

    The rationale is flawed. To be born of Philippine blood does not readily mean that the person accept the nationality.

    Jus soli should be considered to replace jus sanguins as the predominating principle in determination of nationality. A person may be born by Filipino blood and is raised in another country may not know anything about the Philippines. However a person born and grew up in the Philippines know its culture and may be patriotic towards the country. People who are born in the Philippines should be considered natural born citizens.

    B. Dissenting opinion:

    There are two principes which dictates the acquisition of citizenship by birth. Blood relationship is the basis for the Jus Sangunis principle while place of birth for Jus Soli. In the Philippines, the predominating principle is jus sanguinis where in the natural born citizens are determined by blood.

    The rationale is correct. By having a Filipino lineage should dictate that the person is Filipino since it will be well seen in the physical appearance.

    It is justifiable that a person is Filipino if he has a Filipino ancestor. A person’s ancestry widely influences his principles. People tend to follow the footsteps of his parentage. If so, then it is just appropriate for a person to be considered a citizen of the state based on his origin.

  30. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that a person is rightful to have the same benefits like of his/her ancestors had. The family line has to continue by making blood relation a strong basis for citizenship.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    It is flawed because one’s family cannot insist to his/her next generation the love he/she has for his/her country. Bloodline cannot dictate anyone which path to follow.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.
    When Jus soli is implemented it will be more likely to be possible since where you were born goes where your loyalty begins.
    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that a person is rightful to have the same benefits like his/her ancestors had. The family line has to continue by making blood relation a strong basis for citizenship.
    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    When a person is raised in the same culture like his/her family has, more likely he/she has the same belief with his/her family.
    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    It is justifiable to be considered a citizen of a state where your ancestors are citizen because there’s the same blood flowing in your bodies meaning you share a lot of common things even the love for your country.

  31. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus Sanguinis is that having Filipino parents will make you a Filipino even if you are born outside the Philippines.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    Filipino is like a brand. One may have pure Filipino parents but it does not mean that he can be called a Filipino. A person must act as a true Filipino before he can be branded as one. Being a Filipino means he have the freedom to use the benefit given to us by the country. This may be abused by those people living in other countries who acquired their Filipino citizenship by Jus Sanguinis.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus Sanguinis with Jus Soli. Justify the proposal.

    Citizenship must be acquired by Jus Soli provided they will live here in the country for some time and learn the values and cultures of the Filipinos.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the doctrine of Jus Sanguinis.

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus Sanguinis is that having Filipino parents will make you a Filipino even if you are born outside the Philippines.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    The rationale is proven to be correct by the mere fact that a Filipino blood running in the person. That way, the traits and characteristics of a Filipino will be dominant in the person even if he/she will grow in other country.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    Principles from Filipino ancestors are passed down to several generations. Learning and having these principles will make you a true Filipino. It will be better if citizenship shall be determined by having a Filipino ancestor because we will be sure that in that way, genuine Filipino traits will be acquired from those ancestors.

  32. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    -The doctrine of Jus Sanguinis explains that the citizenship of an individual is acqured not by the place of birth rather, by the bloodline, thus it would mean that a filipino would only be a filipino citizen if he had filipino parent/s

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    The rationale is flawed because when born on another country, which follows Jus Soli principle, conflicts on the citizenship of the born would arise. wheter to follow the citizenship of his bloodline, or adapt the citizenship to where he/she was born.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus sanguinis. Justify the proposal.
    -Considering Jus Soli as basis of Filipino Citizenship would be better to prevent confusion for someone who was born abroad. Had Jus Soli be the basis of citizenship, then it would be the ones born here should exclusively be considered as filipino citizen.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    -The doctrine of Jus Sanguinis explains that the citizenship of an individual is acqured not by the place of birth rather, by the bloodline, thus it would mean that a filipino would only be a filipino citizen if he had filipino parent/s

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    The rationale is correct because what determines the citizenship, what unites the Filipino nation, more than the land they were born from, is the blood that runs through our veins. Then, it is right that Jus Sanguinis must be the sole basis of giving Filipino Citizenship.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    -Citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is citizen of the state, in order to preserve the culture and tradition of the people living in the state, had it not been this way, then the traces of the rich Filipino culture may not have been the way we know it and we are proud of right now.

  33. Concurring Opinion
    1.) Jus sanguinis states that whoever your parents are, as long as they are Filipinos, then you are also a Filipino.
    2.) The rationale is flawed because people born in other countries always consider themselves native to that country. They will only proclaim that they are Filipino whenever there is something good that happened in the Philippines or someone made something great that the world recognized it too, a good example is the fights of Manny Pacquiao.
    3.) Jus soli is a right by which nationality or citizenship can be acknowledged to any individual born in the territory of the country. A human being can be considered a citizen by the state where he was born because he will definitely take on their traits.
    Dissenting Opinion
    1.) Jus sanguinis states that whoever your parents are, as long as they are Filipinos, then you are also a Filipino.
    2.) The rationale is correct because we will (at all times) look like a genuine Filipino, even if we like it or not. We obtain qualities of a Filipino through our blood.
    3.) Citizenship should be determined by having a predecessor who is a citizen of the state for they have qualities and attributes that make them as Filipino. These unique traits are passed on from generations to generations that define their citizenship as Filipinos.

  34. A. Concurring Opinion

    This provision gives importance to the blood relation of the person to an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state.

    It is flawed in the sense that being a citizen of a state automatically does not give the person the need to prove himself deserving of the citizenship,instead taking advantage of the privelege.

    I think it would do no better if it is either Jus sanguinis or jus solis. Citizenship should be a choice that an individual must be allowed to make.

    B. Dissenting Opinion

    This provision gives importance to the blood relation of the person to an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state.

    The provision is good and should still be the policy because it recognizes and honors the blood of the country’s heroes that runs thr0ugh the veins of each child of each new generation.

  35. oops..’privilege..Ü

  36. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    Traits are passed from generation to generation. The child inherits the traits of their parents. It is in the blood. If a person is seen to have a distinguishing trait that is from a certain race then that person is considered of that race or citizen.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    Even though the parents are Filipino it does not follow that the child is Filipino too because it can be that the child maybe raised in other countries thus giving the child a non Filipino trait and accommodating to the traits of the place he/she grew up in.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.

    It doesn’t matter if an individual does not have Filipino blood as long as that individual knows how to be a true Filipino in mind, body and the heart then he is considered to be Filipino.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    Traits are passed from generation to generation. The child inherits the traits of their parents. It is in the blood. If a person is seen to have a distinguishing trait that is from a certain race then that person is considered of that race or citizen.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    It because of the fact that children inherent their parents genes that they have part of their body truly known as a Filipino whether what amount of change he/she does to their own body it cannot be masked that the individual is a Filipino.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    If that person has the genes of the same ancestry then he/she is considered also a citizen of the state for he has the same traits or characteristics.

  37. A.Concurring Opinion:

    1.State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    >>Jus Sanguinis doctrine states that being a Filipino is determined by blood relation. Having Filipino parents can already make you one, since you have Filipino traits through them.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    >>The rationale is flawed because having such traits are not enough to be able to determine one’s nationality, since not all traits are acquired by a child. These proofs are too shallow to determine whether one is a natural born Filipino.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.
    >>Replacing it would be better since someone could properly learn how to live as a Filipino if he/she would be able to live in the Philippines. Parents cannot teach all the Filipino traits to their children. Some can be passed through traditions but still, not all.

    B.Dissenting Opinion:

    1.State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    >>Jus Sanguinis doctrine states that being a Filipino is determined by blood relation. Having Filipino parents can already make you one, since you have Filipino traits through them.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    >>The rationale is correct because one can be considered a Filipino when he/she look like one. A person would not carry a Filipino trait within him/her if there’s no Filipino blood in him/her.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    >>Because our ancestors is connected with us, they are also from whom we came from. Therefore, their nationality or citizenship is the same with us.
    –having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state will guide you on what a citizen of the state should be and what kind of citizen you should be.

  38. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that the nationality of an individual is not determined by the place of his/her birth, this is determined by the nationality of the parents, or simply his/her ancestry.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    The rationale is flawed because oftentimes with the effects of cultural diversity, a person may have a difficulty in blending-in socially with people of different race with his or her ancestry. Identity that reflects on the physical attributes is oftentimes distinct with other nationality. The things that makes a great impact to an individual is what should be the basis of his/her nationality, and that would include the birthplace.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.

    Jus soli, where nationality or citizenship is recognized to any individual born in the said country, is much appropriate because it avoids confusion. Moreover, a person can be considered a citizen by the state where he/she was born because in time, he or she will learn to blend in and adapt to the country’s own culture.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    The rationale for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis is that the nationality of an individual is not determined by the place of his/her birth, this is determined by the nationality of the parents, or simply his/her ancestry.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    The rationale is correct because the parents are very people who guide their children as they grow and mature. With this kind of relationship, the kind of culture that the parents passed to their children is no other than their very own which is also the reflection of their ancestry. This makes it easier for people to embrace their nationality.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    Citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state because the very blood that flows in a person makes up the identity of that person. Moreover, this traits also reflects to that person not only physically but also in many aspects.

  39. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    The citizenship is based at the place of birth.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    The rationale is flawed because what if his parents are not a citizen of that place,then Jus sanguinis just wont fit.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus Solis. Justify the proposal.

    The proposal is better because if your parents are both Americans then you should also be an american regardless of the place of birth.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus Solis.

    Citizenship is determined by the citizenship of the parents regardless of the birth place.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    The rationale is correct because if your parents are both Americans then it will be awkward if your a Filipino citizen

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    Having ancestor who is a citizen of the state must be must be a great reason because it only shows that you really belong in to that place.

  40. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.

    Jus sanguinis is a social policy by which nationality or citizenship is not determined by place of birth, but by having an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state. Having an ancestor that is a Filipino will automatically grant a person its citizenship.

    This policy is flawed. It is not justifiable for a person to have a citizenship just by having a heritage. If that person lived in other country and he learns that his ancestor is from the Philippines but he is not accustomed to the traditions in Philippines this consider him foreign to his said native land.

    We should replace it by Jus Soli, that is you are a citizen when you are born in the Philippines. Most probably will live in the Philippines and learn the ways in the Philippines that will make him a true blood Filipino.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    Jus sanguinis is a social policy by which nationality or citizenship is not determined by place of birth, but by having an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state. Having an ancestor that is a Filipino will automatically grant a person its citizenship.

    Though a person is not accustomed to the Philippines, but he have an ancestor there, he can be considered a Filipino. He should have a right to be one because it is where his family originated from the first place.

  41. 1. RATIONALE IS THAT…
    … to be a citizen of the Philippines, one must have to be a descendant of a Filipino. This might be because those who have the blood of a Filipino tend to be more nationalistic and loyal to the country. This may also be to prevent foreigners from running over the country and using our resources as well.
    2. THE RATIONALE IS FLAWED BECAUSE…
    … blood alone cannot be the only proof that you are a Filipino. A nationality may also be determined through loyalty to one’s country.
    3. I PROPOSE…
    … that jus sanguinis may not be the only measure to one’s being a Filipino. Jus Soli and proof of willingness, knowledge, and loyalty may also be some of the criteria.
    B.
    1. RATIONALE IS THAT…
    … to be a citizen of the Philippines, one must have to be a descendant of a Filipino. This might be because those who have the blood of a Filipino tend to be more nationalistic and loyal to the country. This may also be to prevent foreigners from running over the country and using our resources as well.
    2. THE RATIONALE IS CORRECT BECAUSE…
    … a person’s lineage is one of the few things he or she cannot change. Once you are born to be a Filipino, you are a Filipino. Nothing can change that. It is perfectly logical to choose jus sanguinis over jus solis for this reason.
    3. CITIZENSHIP SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY HAVING AN ANCESTOR WHO IS A CITIZEN OF THE STATE BECAUSE…
    … having Filipino lineage is a much stronger factor of being a citizen. It does not follow that if you own a land in the country, it doesn’t mean that you should be a citizen of the country. Besides, if we consider jus solis to determine the citizenship of a person, then many foreigners might abuse the benefits that this country is here to offer to its citizens and use it to their own benefits.

  42. A.Concurring Opinion:

    1.State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    >> Citizenship is defined by Jus Sanguinis as to having an ancestor who is a citizen of the State. It is not determined by place of birth. On the contrary, Jus Soli states that nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individial born in the territory of the related State.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.

    >> It is flawed because some people may not be given the chance to become a natural-born citizen of the State if his ancestors are not citizens of the State. Some can be granted with citizenship if their parents are living in the Philippines for a long time and that their parents have already learned Filipino traits.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.

    >> Jus Sanguinis must be replaced by Jus Soli because citizenship can not only be determined by blood relation. Some people must also be granted with this citizenship even if their parents are not natural-born citizens.

    B.Dissenting Opinion:

    1.State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.

    >> Citizenship is defined by Jus Sanguinis as to having an ancestor who is a citizen of the State. It is not determined by place of birth. On the contrary, Jus Soli states that nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individial born in the territory of the related State.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.

    >> It is correct because someone is considered a Filipino if Filipino blood runs through him. It is awkward to consider someone a Filipino if he/she does not have Filipino traits, may it be physically or socially.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

    >> Having an ancestor who is a citizen of the Philippines assures that the child is a true Filipino because the same blood is running through him. Filipino traits are definitely inherited by the child.

  43. Concurring opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The doctrine of Jus sanguinis states that if your parents are of Filipino blood, then you are a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    The rationale is flawed because even if your parents are Filipino but you grew up at another country, then you are not a true Filipino.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.
    If you we’re born and grew up in the Philippines, it is only natural that you are used to the Philippines; culture and traditions. This makes you a real Filipino since you follow their customs. It makes you part of the people of the Philippines.

    Dissenting opinion:

    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    The doctrine of Jus sanguinis states that if your parents are of Filipino blood, then you are a Filipino.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    This is correct because the Filipino blood runs in your blood. You will always look like a Filipino and you will probably develop Filipino manners.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    Citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state because those will be the physical characteristics that you will inherit. Instead of being ashamed of your lineage, you should carry it with pride because that is who you are.

  44. Concurring opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) for the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The doctrine of Jus sanguinis defines the determination of citizenship by one’s bloodline. A natural born Filipino citizen has ancestors which are also Filipinos. Jus soli states that nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individial born in the territory of the related State.

    2. Explain why the rationale is flawed.
    – The rationale is flawed because people whose ancestors are not citizens of the State may not be given the chance to become a natural-born citizen of the State. Some can be granted with citizenship if their parents are living in the Philippines for a long time and that their parents have already learned Filipino traits.

    3. Consider the proposal to replace Jus sanguinis with Jus soli. Justify the proposal.
    – It is ony logical that jus sanguinis be replaced with jus soli because citizenship is not defined by one’s blood lineage alone. Citizenship should not be a mere birthright, it should also be acquired through one’s means of living.

    Dissenting opinion:
    1. State the rationale (reason for being) of the the doctrine of Jus sanguinis.
    – The doctrine of Jus sanguinis defines the determination of citizenship by one’s bloodline. A natural born Filipino citizen has ancestors which are also Filipinos. Jus soli states that nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individial born in the territory of the related State.

    2. Explain why the rationale is correct.
    – The mere fact that Filipino blood runs in a person it possible that the traits and characteristics of a Filipino will be dominant in the person even if he/she will grow in another country.

    3. Justify why citizenship should be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.
    – No one can choose his ancestry. It is a birthright; a gift and a curse. There can be no denying one’s own ancestry. Thus, it is logical, and more practical that citizenship be determined by having an ancestor who is a citizen of the state.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: