Posted on 04/30/2011 12:49:21 AM PDT by djf
This is a very interesting post! :-)
Thank you. Took me a couple hours of research and transcribing the French stuff ain’t exactly easy.....
;-)
And I still missed a couple “f”’s, like in “confervation”...
DOH!!!
I had trois ans du Francais in high school. Actually could have considered myself semi-fluent way back then...
http://www.archive.org/details/lawnationsorpri01ingrgoog
664 pages, but if you have the time, it’s not copyrighted due to age and available to read or download online.
Thanks. I already have the French editions and the English translations in PDF form.
at the very least born on the soil OF A FATHER who IS A CITIZEN!
FATHER... please. We no longer live in a patriarchy. Women's rights abolished legal patriarchal responsibility.
In an age of artificial insemination do you honestly under the wildest imaginations of the cosmos believe that Obama will be impeached because his father was foreign which was known to everyone before he was elected and known to the Congress and Supreme Court who put him in office.
If you are trying to win some philosophical question about the Founding Fathers intention or their "heart of hearts" on the nbc clause, well you MIGHT be right. If you have any other expectation, you are only hurting yourself.
Does Obama "Belong to the Country?"
Unfortunately yes. And the more distracted we are the more likely he will reside in 1600 Penn Ave. for another 4 years. Just tonight Mark Levin took a caller who was frantic saying we can't wait 18 months. He begged Mark, is there anything we can do to get him out before then.. Mark said, "No." 1961 does not matter. 2012 matters.
Well, the founders knew what they meant and they said what they wrote.
I’m just putting some historical and literal context around it.
People are free to ignore it.
Emmerich de Vattel - 1778 EditionBOOK 1, CHAPTER 19
Of Our Native Country, and Several Things That Relate to It
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Volume I A Photographic Reproduction of Books I and II of the First Edition 1758 with an Introduction by Albert de LapradelleTRANSLATION OF THE EDITION OF 1758 By Charles G Fenwick WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY ALBERT DE LAPRADELLE
CHAPTER XIX One's Country and Various Matters Relating to It
The members of a civil society are its citizens. Bound to that society by certain duties and subject to its authority, they share equally in the advantages it offers. Its natives are those who are born in the country of parents who are citizens. As the society can not maintain and perpetuate itself except by the children of its citizens, these children naturally take on the status of their fathers and enter upon all the latter's rights. The society is presumed to desire this as the necessary means of its self preservation, and it is justly to be inferred that each citizen, upon entering into the society, reserves to his children the right to be members of it. The country of a father is therefore that of his children, and they become true citizens by their mere tacit consent. We shall see presently whether, when arrived at the age of reason, they may renounce their right and the duty they owe to the society in which they are born. I repeat that in order to belong to a country one must be born there of a father who is a citizen; for if one is born of foreign parents, that land will only be the place of one's birth, and not one's country.
------------------------------------------------------
THE LAW OF NATIONSFROM THE NEW EDITION, BY
JOSEPH CHITTY, Esq. Barrister At Law
WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES AND REFERENCES,
By EDWARD D. INGRAHAM, Esq.
PHILADELPHIA:T. & J.W. JOHNSON & CO., LAW BOOKSELLERS,
No. 535 CHESTNUT STREET.1883.
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
Thanks! Thing is, reading French it comes back to me very slowly, and I wouldn’t trust a translation I did as far as I could spit it!
A poster on a previous thread, GJones2, told me he reads French and after reading Vattel’s paragraph 212 in French said he agreed with my interpretation. Which is to say the same conclusion you have come to; “natural born citizen” means born in the native land of citizen parents.
I’m interested in the phrase “belong to the country”.
Also, I tried here to show that it IS NOT AN OBSCURE REFERENCE, Franklin himself saying that they were consulting it often, often enough for it to influence American law and decisions way before the Constitutional Convention.
Was anyone listening to Neil Boortz’s radio show Friday? His guest host who I think was Erick Erickson got a call from someone who tried to bring up the “natural born” question. Erickson said the issue had been decided in 1793 and that citizenship passed through the mother. Any idea what he was talking about? He didn’t cite any references and pretty much brushed off the caller and moved on to something else.
I can't see how anyone can doubt that the Founding Fathers used Vattel extensively to guide them. There are many quotes by them of him.
BHO II was born with Dual Citizenship.
Not NBC.
DUAL.
Not eligible!
What you are proposing is nothing less than the overt overthrow of the literal and the figurative intent of the Constitution and its authors when they denied the Office of the President and the Office of the President to any person whosoever owed allegiance to a foreign sovereign at birth or after birth once the Constitution was adopted in 1797.
If you cannot and will not respect the Constitution and its requirement for Amendment even in this matter, then what do we have left but mob rule by force of arms in the hands of the Democrat Party who is overthrowing it without Amendment or ratification by the sovereign States? If the subversion of the Constitution is not stopped here and now, then when and where? What will be the issue, the Commerce clause, the War Poweers Act, something else? How bad does it have to get? How many Americans must die before the Constitution and its most obscure provisions become important enough to you?
What is next, an alien citizen such as Roger Calero will be allowed to run on the ballots for President in a third Presidential electon without so much as a peep from people like you?
There was a naturalization act of sorts passed by one of the first Congresses, then repealed four years later. I haven’t read it, I should dig it out, one of my computers has the complete collection of United States Statutes at Large on it...
I don’t think it’s relevant because Congress CANNOT change by legislation what the founders meant and wrote at the convention.
Very nice, interesting material.
Thanks.
I could have done better with the formatting, but hey, Friday night, coupla beers...
;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.