Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DoughtyOne; SatinDoll
Hi DoughtyOne. I owe you an apology. I have the flu and I was interrupted by natures call. I had planned to make the following summation before I posted.

As the link shows there is no such thing as a citizen category called Natural Born. However as SatinDoll pointed out it is a requirement to be eligible to run for President.

Here is her post again. Take another look and you will see what I am saying.

SatinDoll wrote: “We’re not discussing citizenship when the subject is ‘natural born citizen’.

Three types of citizenship are recognized by our government: native born; naturalized; and citizen-by-statute. All have equal rights. All can serve in Congress, either as a Representative in the House, or as a Senator in the Senate.
The following link will take you to the government’s own Immigration Service web page describing the three types of citizenship.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD
Natural Born Citizen is NOT a type of statutory citizenship as per the Federal Government. Natural Born is ONLY an eligibility requirement for the U.S. Presidency per Article II, Section 1, clause 5, of the U.S. Constitution, and requires, as per the Founders, the President to be born in the United States (jus solis) AND of citizen parents (jus sanguinas).

No one has the RIGHT to be President. The eligibility requirement of Natural Born Citizenship (jus solis + jus sanguinas: born in the U.S. of U.S. citizen parents) must be viewed as a means to prevent split allegiance for any President of the United States.”

I hope this clears up my meaning. I’m sorry for not make myself clear to begin with.

Cheers:>) EasyDoesIt

30 posted on 03/19/2012 4:33:10 PM PDT by eazdzit (Practicing islam should be TREASON? WE need a 3rd Party. NEWT/PALIN in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: eazdzit

Eazdzit, I’m not trying to give you a hard time, and I don’t want an apology from you at all. I’m not unhappy with you. I’m just interested to see how the government site you linked me to bears on the issue in question. See your Government site reference here: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=a2ec6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

I went there, didn’t see anything pertaining to the presidency. I actually searched for the words ‘president’ and ‘presidency’ in there to see if I had missed something, and didn’t find one instance of either.

If you think that the U. S. Constitution clarifies this, then I would urge you to link to Article II, Section I, Clause IV. Here’s a link to that. (please see Paragraph V. @:) http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

In that paragraph it states...

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Here it does not preclude children (people) who were born on U. S. soil to foreign nationals.

So you linked me to a government web page that does not clarify the issue. You also mentioned a portion of the U. S. Constitution covering this issue that does not clarify the issue.

That’s all I’m saying. I don’t see the justification for your and or SatinDoll’s comment that children born on U. S. soil, whose parents were not citizens, cannot be considered natural born citizens. You may both be right. I just don’t see justification for that perception at this point.

To my way of thinking, it is an absurdity on top of an absurdity to think that children born to illegal aliens are not only considered citizens, but may also be eligible to run for the presidency. None the less, I do not see anything precluding this to be true.

This being the case, I welcome some form of rebuttal that indicates my take on this is wrong. My take is that our Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches would not strike down such a child’s ultimate eligibility.

I’m not trying to put words into SatinDoll’s mouth here either. If she didn’t make the case you are, then I apologize to her. And to you I admit she may have said it on this very thread. I just didn’t review her comments here since she didn’t address me directly.

I await your response.

Take care.


35 posted on 03/20/2012 10:58:33 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (I believe in Cap and Trade. I know, I know... Cap spending and trade Obama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson