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

To: Natufian
Not necessarily... Merely that what you claim is not supported by any evidence.

You don't consider extant copies of the "Law of Nations", published in the 18th century as proof of the definition of the term at the time the Constitution was ratified?

You don't consider as proof the fact that the eligibility clause in [Article II; Section 1] of the U.S. Constitution is proof that the requirements for the Commander in Chief were different from other Constitutional offices......and the fact that the framers "sun-setted" it for future generations?

Your argument lacks much credibility.........

91 posted on 08/11/2013 7:38:02 PM PDT by Diego1618 (Put "Ron" on the Rock!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]


To: Diego1618

I think you’ve shown that there was at least one school of thought that argued for your definition. You’ve failed to account for other schools of thought that may have taken a different approach. One, say, based on the legal system that the Founders were raised in such as
the English Common Law.

What you have entirely failed to is to provide any evidence that you were taught the birther definition of NBC in Civics classes. Plenty have made that assertion in the last 5 years but none have been able to link to anything to back it up despite the internet being awash with examples of old school text books. And you talk about my credibility....


105 posted on 08/11/2013 11:04:47 PM PDT by Natufian (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | 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