It is not in any way irrelevant to bring up Wright, or Ayers. They are qualified to run, per the Constitution, yet they hate America. The Constitution has nothing in it that prevents someone who hates America from running.
Yes the Constitution requires a person to be a NBC, AND at least 35, AND to have been a resident for 14 years. Thus my example:
Someone born of citizen parents in the USA, which you admit is a NBC. Moved abroad at 6 months, they remain a US citizen. Bought up in a foreign country as a citizen of that country - Iran or Italy, take your choice.
At 45, after 44.5 years of living as a foreign citizen overseas, having retained US citizenship at 21, he moves back. 14 years later, he could run for President.
If you prefer, have him move back at 21, retaining his NBC status, and running at 35 - having spent over half his life living as a citizen of Iran.
Can he run for President? Is his loyalty divided? In what sense would Obama’s loyalty be divided any more?
The Founders were trying to prevent a foreign monarch from coming over. Thus, for President only, a person cannot be a NATURALIZED citizen, but must be one by birth. However, the legal term they used DID allow them to be born in the USA to non-citizen parents. That is the undisputed meaning of NBS and thus NBC, which is the Americanized version, used at the time interchangeably.
I don’t care if you don’t like it.
But lets turn this around. What REASON do you have for believing NBC requires 2 citizen parents?
At this point, Mr Rogers, I have answered all your questions—including the one w which you concluded your last post. Why are you asking me to waste my time by repeating myself? If you didn’t listen the first time, that’s not my problem.