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

To: Harlan1196
I want to err on the side of the law.

No you don't. You want all the hodgepodge of law that has occurred subsequent to 1787 to alter and/or obfuscate the correct meaning of a constitutional term.

You are wrong on the NBC = two citizen parents. The courts will reject your argument.

And now I am beginning to think you are stupid. Again! With that non sequitur!

Let me make this very clear for you. I do not give a D@MN what a Court says about this issue, ESPECIALLY one that has not looked at the evidence. *YOU* may need a minder to tell you what to think, but the rest of us are intelligent enough to research this ourselves and find out what the founders meant.

They most certainly did not mean to allow anchor babies.

408 posted on 02/21/2012 11:49:13 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of our justice system that I can’t help you with. That “hodgepodge of law” is the American Common Law. Whether you give a damn what a court believes is irrelevant - that is our system of justice and it is not going to change because of your pet peeve.

The present definition of NBC is the same as it was in 1787. NBS=NBC=born on US soil.

You disagree - I got it.


410 posted on 02/21/2012 11:56:18 AM PST by Harlan1196
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | View Replies ]

To: DiogenesLamp
And now I am beginning to think you are stupid.
Read #409. He isn't stupid, he's a snake!
411 posted on 02/21/2012 11:57:44 AM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 408 | 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