No my FRiend, it is you who has no idea of what you’re talking about.
It goes on to define what, exactly, is considered U.S. soil. It gets so specific that it defines when birth on a military vessel is considered birth on U.S. soil. (BTW: international waters = no.)
Again, I read that entire document and this is addressing U.S. citizenship of the children of non-U.S. citizens born on U.S facilities or for that matter in international waters, on U.S. owned vessels, etc. and not those of U.S. citizens living or serving in the military or in the diplomatic service abroad. Read the links I provided in my previous posts about U.S. citizenship of the children of U.S. citizen parents living or serving abroad and get back to me.
Yes, Ax’s children are citizens at birth. No one is disputing that. According to the State Dept., that does not, however, automatically grant them eligibility under the Constitution for the presidency. The courts have not ruled on the eligibility of those granted citizenship at birth by statute.
There are only two types of citizens as defined in the U.S. Constitution and by the 14th Amendment: those who were born here (natural born citizens) and those who became citizens through naturalization. Since Ax’s children were citizens at and from birth and not merely by statute or later by naturalization and most importantly given that both their parents were U.S. citizens at the time of their births and that he was serving abroad as an active duty member in good standing of the U.S. military and that those children did not have to be naturalized or apply for citizenship at a later date, they are NBC’s and have all the rights granted to them under the Constitution including eligibility to run and be elected POTUS as if they had been born in the 50 contiguous United States. They, being born to a U.S. military member, a U.S. born citizen AND his U.S. born citizen wife are unquestionably just as much U.S. citizens by birth, NBC’s as you or I, and I’m sure many members of the military serving overseas find it insulting that you imply otherwise.
If what you claim was really true; that the children born of U.S. citizen military service members or those of U.S. diplomats and their U.S. citizen spouses while they were honorably serving our country overseas, are not U.S. citizens with ALL the rights that would be otherwise granted to them had they been born while their parents were serving in the very same capacity states side, how many military service members or diplomats would be willing to take very important overseas assignments overseas if that meant that their children born during their overseas assignments would have some sort of second class citizenship?
Are you trying to say that Ax’s children are second class citizens or lesser citizens than you or I just because he, a U.S. born citizen and his U.S. born citizen wife, scarified living in the U.S. for some years in order to serve his country as he was ordered by the U.S. military to do so?
And yet you still don't understand the purpose of Consular Affairs as defined within the Foreign Affairs manual published by the State Department. You say red is green until you're blue in the face. That doesn't make it so.
Read the links I provided in my previous posts about U.S. citizenship of the children of U.S. citizen parents living or serving abroad and get back to me.
No, but I will quote to you what the State Department's Foreign Affairs manual says about those children.
7 FAM 1131.6 Nature of Citizenship Acquired by Birth Abroad to U.S. Citizen Parents7 FAM 1131.6-1 Status Generally
(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)
Persons born abroad who acquire U.S. citizenship at birth by statute generally have the same rights and are subject to the same obligations as citizens born in the United States who acquire citizenship pursuant to the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. One exception is that they may be subject to citizenship retention requirements.
7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency (TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural-born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
d.(Skip) In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.
I never implied otherwise.
If what you claim was really true; that the children born of U.S. citizen military service members or those of U.S. diplomats and their U.S. citizen spouses while they were honorably serving our country overseas, are not U.S. citizens with ALL the rights that would be otherwise granted to them had they been born while their parents were serving in the very same capacity states side,
I never claimed that. You need to take a class in reading comprehension.