I’m tired of spoon feeding you. If you have a legitimate, valid question about Wong, then great. But, you just keep chirping, and every so often I have to throw another regurgitated worm in your mouth.
Are you incapable of reading Wong? Do you need a link? When you read legal cases, you often have to read them more than once, particularly one as long, and as full of citations as Wong.
If you did, you would realize that there is language in the case which says, in effect “natural born subject=natural born citizen”, and that within the case, the terms, and variations thereof, are used interchangeably. It is the holding that is important.
And it doesn’t require permanent domicile, and if one cite says “citizen” it isn’t necessarily a “gotcha” moment, because the language is being culled from numerous sources across centuries and across continents. It is tiring trying to explain this to a person who hasn’t read the case and keeps popping up hollering “gotcha” when they haven’t a clue what they are talking about.
You are too busy hollering “gotcha” to read the case or understand the issues. This is a sign of immaturity. It often happens with young debaters. Too much emphasis, here and you never grow into a good debater, because you will be focused on the small things, and miss the big things, which a knowledgable person will clobber you with.
So, if you want my input, or responses, read the case, and make intelligent “gotchas”. I will respond to an intelligent “gotcha”. I will not respond to “I fling poo gotchas.”
parsy, who says, Fair Enough?
I love the affectation, but it’s still the same, tired futility game. I know you can’t refute my points, so I understand your desperation. Just admit you were wrong. This is not a winning move for you.