[woofie]

wouldn’t a strict interpretation say that the founders were dealing with the situation of citizenship at the time that the constitution was adopted? In other words they were not thinking about 200 years later

[thesetruths]

wouldn’t a strict interpretation say that the founders were dealing with the situation of citizenship at the time that the constitution was adopted? In other words they were not thinking about 200 years later

I think they definitely were thinking about both scenarios, since they mentioned the exception to the natural born rule being a citizen at the time of adoption.

[mountn man]

wouldn’t a strict interpretation say that the founders were dealing with the situation of citizenship at the time that the constitution was adopted? In other words they were not thinking about 200 years later

That would apply if you thought of the Constitution as a living document.

If you do any research into the Constitution, it becomes VERY apparent that the founding fathers put a lot of thought into the foundation of our country, for its future.

These men, though maybe 200 years ago, were by no means backwards nubes. In fact just the opposite, I'd say that by todays standards they'd be considered geniuses.

I think they'd also be appalled at where our country is today, and each and everyone would probably race to take up arms, to reverse what our country has become.

They did not take their responsibilty lightly. Unlike most of us today (including myself).

[BP2]

>>> wouldn’t a strict interpretation say that the founders were dealing with the situation of citizenship at the time that the constitution was adopted? In other words they were not thinking about 200 years later

No, that would be a looser interpretation - or Revisionism. You know like, "our Framers didn't understand the crime we'd have today. We don't need that part in the 4th Amendment about Search and Seizure anymore. If our police need to look in a house that may have drugs, they can kick the door down and confiscate the evidence to check it back in their CSI lab without cause, and without a warrant. After all, 200 years ago, they did not know the problems we'd face today...

Unfortunately, last time I checked, the Constitution does not have lungs or a heartbeat, i.e., it's NOT a living document.

[SerafinQ]

they actually did address the matter of time. they clearly made provisions for those who, like themselves, could not be natural born citizens due to the fact that the nation dd not exist at the time of their births. They made it crystal clear that anyone born after the adoption of the constitution would have to be a natural born citizen in order to become president. additionally, the vice-president must also meet the same qualifications.