[Revel]

“Please provide the relevant sections of the U.S. Constitution that clearly and unambiguously define “Natural Born” as requiring two U.S. Citizens at birth.”

Lame. Obviously the meaning of the term “Natural Born” was as clear to the people of the time as the term “Thou shout not kill”. The only way to prove anything is to define what “Natural born citizen” meant. There is a common sense tendency to believe that it meant a lot. That it was in fact the strongest qualifying term used in the entire constitution. Because it is in fact so important to the survival of the country. I would be curious to see how ancient dictionaries defined the term.

I do know that anyone with any survival skills who was sitting down to write such a great constitution would be a fools to not raise that bar to an extreme level.

For me it would be a citizen born in the US to two US parents. With the only exclusion being any US citizen who fought in the revolutionary war.

[SoConPubbie]

Lame. Obviously the meaning of the term “Natural Born” was as clear to the people of the time as the term “Thou shout not kill”. The only way to prove anything is to define what “Natural born citizen” meant. There is a common sense tendency to believe that it meant a lot. That it was in fact the strongest qualifying term used in the entire constitution. Because it is in fact so important to the survival of the country. I would be curious to see how ancient dictionaries defined the term.

Whether you think it is lame or not, The US Constitution, US Laws, and SCOTUS rulings are the records of authority on the issue, NOT your understanding of what it meant or how many people believed it's meaning to require 2 Parents that were US Citizens.

Words have meaning. You just can't assume something and expect it to be constitutional.

Furthermore, you don't know if everyone held that definition or opinion, I've seen documents from just after the Constitution was signed where some people stated that it did not require 2 US Citizen parents, thus the need for it to be spelled out if you want it to be an actual Consitutional and Legal definition.

[SoConPubbie]

All of your rebuttal was just your opinion.

Nothing of that statement established the current constitutional and/or legal nature of your opinion.

As of right now according to the US Constitution, it's Amendments, US Law and SCOTUS rulings, Senator Ted Cruz IS a Natural Born US Citizen, he is older than 35 years of age and therefore, Senator Ted Cruz is eligible to be President of the United States.


CRUZ or LOSE!

[DoodleDawg]

Obviously the meaning of the term “Natural Born” was as clear to the people of the time as the term “Thou shout not kill”.

Obviously not, if the posts on this thread are any indication.

For me it would be a citizen born in the US to two US parents. With the only exclusion being any US citizen who fought in the revolutionary war.

With all due respect your opinion isn't any more binding than mine is. The fact is that the Constitution mentions only two kinds of citizenship; natural-born or naturalized. If you're not one then you're the other. And Cruz wasn't naturalized.

[morphing libertarian]

IMO it would have been inconceivable for the constitutional congress to intend that a person born of a British father could be president.