Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: patlin
So far you have shown nothing and you have linked to nothing. Therefore your rebuttals are without merit.

Since the act of the first Congress, and the finding of the Supreme Court do not count as examples to show my case, I believe I cannot show any more.

Now can you meet your own standard or proof? What is used to prove your own position to be conclusive and beyond reproach?

218 posted on 05/15/2010 1:47:29 PM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies ]


To: PugetSoundSoldier
You say WKA redefined NBC, yet you still have not shown in the deciding opinion where that occurred in the holding of the case. and for that matter, one Constitutional Amendment does not redefine another unless expressly written in the text and there is not one notation as to that effect. To think that Congress, after just going through another bloody civil war to reunite the states, as well as the citizens of those states would have ratified a constitutional amendment that would allow a child of a foreigner not yet naturalized to become president just goes to show you are definitely off your rocker and are only in this fight for your own personal agenda which does not include patriotism to our country.
220 posted on 05/15/2010 2:44:38 PM PDT by patlin (1st SCOTUS of USA: "Human life, from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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