Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Jeff Winston
"I am a huge fan of Mr Rogers, and have seen an awful lot from him that is just SPOT ON agrees with me. "

Fixed it for you.

I would have to side with DoctorBulldog on this and say that a reasonable translation of "sujets naturels," in English, would be "natural born subjects." So technically well, a point for DoctorBulldog.

This is not an academic point. There is an official treaty with France written in 1781, in which the term "natural born citizen" was translated into French as "sujets naturels."

ARTICLE III

Les consuls et vice consuls respectifs ne pourront être pris que parmi les sujets naturels de la puissance qui les nommera. Tous seront appointés par leur souverain respectif, et ils ne pourront en conséquence faire aucun trafic ou commerce quelconque ni pour leur propre compte, ni pour le compte d'autrui.

I have beaten Mr. Rogers over the head with this point a half dozen times, yet he persists in ignoring it. This is one of the reasons I don't bother arguing with him. Another is that he has very personal reasons for wanting Article II to be interpreted in a specific way. He is an interested party, not an objective bystander.

That you were obviously unaware of this usage of "sujets naturels" also calls into question your contention that you have read everything I have had to say on the subject. Obviously you have not.

And Vattel NEVER mentions "citoyens naturels" (plural) or "citoyen naturel" (singular). Not once.

The words "citoyen" and sujet" are synonyms with the usage "sujet" being the more common. At the time, the only form of government in existence was Monarchy.

A word search of "Droit des Gens" reveals 42 usages of the word "citoyen" and "100" usages of the word "sujet."

1,109 posted on 03/11/2013 1:04:06 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 679 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

“I have beaten Mr. Rogers over the head with this point a half dozen times, yet he persists in ignoring it.”

Odd. I have repeatedly supported that translation and usage, and have repeated it. Including on this thread, a few hundred posts back.

And in the famous Vattel passage that birthers build an altar to, Vattel doesn’t write “sujets naturels”, and thus was NOT discussing natural born subjects (or NBC). It wasn’t until 10 years AFTER the Constitution that someone screwed up the translation and inserted it where Vattel did not use it...

So, DL, I assume this means you agree that Vattel has no bearing on the meaning of NBC?


1,113 posted on 03/11/2013 1:18:27 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1109 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


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