Vattel agrees with you.
All three of my kids were born overseas. My sons were born in the U.S. Army Hospital at Camp Zama, Japan, and my daughter was born in a British hospital (private insurance, not on the NHS). Since both of their parents are natural born US Citizens, they can hold any office.
I agree.
7 FAM 1113 NOT INCLUDED IN THE MEANING OF “IN THE UNITED STATES”Additionally, acquiring one's citizenship at birth by statute may not be equal to natural-born citizenship under the Constitution. The following text is from the State Department's Foreign Affairs Manual.c. Birth on U.S. Military Base Outside of the United States or Birth on U.S. Embassy or Consulate Premises Abroad:
(1) Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.”
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. (snip) 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.
Vattel agrees with you.
The interpretation depends upon the status of Camp Zuma. Your daughter is definitely not a natural born citizen. She was not born on US soil. The definition of what constitutes US soil has been settled, and settled again. Congress establishes what soil is sovereign. Certainly embassies are sovereign. The Panama Canal Zone was made sovereign, incorporated, in 1937, a year after McCain was born.
A natural born citizen is born to parents who are citizens, AND, on our soil. Natural born citizens are citizens, the reasoning from Minor v. Happersett, and why Virginia Minor's natural born citizenship was essential to the decision in Minor v. Happersett. As Wong Kim Ark reasserts, citizens have all the rights of natural born citizens. The important distinction is found in Article II Section 1, where natural born citizenship is required for the presidency. You could have been naturalized citizens, but had your children on an incorporated foreign base, and your children would be natural born.
In your case there should be clarification, but never has been. Directing Congress to make laws about who may be President is a direct challenge to separation of powers. What you would like is to have children naturalized under law, declared natural born citizen. Every word in the Constitution must be assumed to have meaning. No definitions are found in the Constitution, though “treason” is the one term modified for our unique republic. Every colony/state had its own naturalization rules, and the Constitution ordered Congress to make “An uniform rule for naturalization”. Only natural born citizens are explicitly defined, referring to the common-law familiar to our framers. Over twenty five attempts to amend that definition have failed to pass.
The tactic used by both parties, both of which have attempted to amend Article II Section 1, twice by John Conyers, once by Menendez, once by Orrin Hatch, and two other attempts, all between 2002 and 2007. Since both parties have political strategies involving loosening Article II, and specifically, the natural born citizen definition, they both agreed to pretend it doesn't exist. Conyers’ amendments would have made Obama eligible. Hatch was thinking about Schwarzenegger, born overseas to aliens, and Menendez would have made Obama eligible.
Democrats wanted Obama in office, and Republicans were for letting McCain claim his entitlement to the party nomination, even though his ineligibility had been examined through almost a decade of legal and congressional investigation. Only wonks followed the old soldier's eligibility issues, along with law professors who saw any Republican as fair game. But then McCain became useful, not just with McCain Feingold, for which he got funding from George Soros, but because he was no more eligible than Obama. Together the two parties crushed any cogent legal discussion from the media. Fox News is owned by a Democrat and a Saudi Prince. They will certainly not entertain eligibility discussions, particularly since that Prince Alwaleed bin-Talal, was Obama’s patron, at least from his Occidental days, and paid for (a twenty million dollar donation) for Obama’s Harvard Law admission.