All I've seen with my own two eyes, as far as facts in evidence in the United States, is a divorce decree between Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and Barak Hussein Obama, Sr. Every understanding of the meaning, of the Constitutional term "natural born citizen," deals with "parents" only. Marriage is not mentioned.
You're going out on a limb, tangentially, assuming that the British would use their Nationality Act to render a child born nearly 50 years ago, a bastard, on the basis of a customary, tribal marriage that thus far has no legal record evidenced. It's not as if anyone is making a spurious claim of British citizenship, here. Obama is at pains to avoid it.
And, British citizenship for Obama, Jr. is not the central problem for him; British citizenship for Obama, Sr. is the central problem for him, because that makes his father an alien.
Apuzzo is arguing that Obama is a British Citizen.
Why don’t you scroll down and read what it means to be a father according to British law.
IF you want to make the claim that Sr was NEVER married to Kezia- which I think is ridiculous...then go ahead and do so..but don’t pretend that UK citizenship law didn’t address Bigamist marriages. It did because they knew this was practiced in some of their colonies.
They had different classes of citizens and their law is quite complicated.
But one thing is for certain, the parents HAD TO BE MARRIED.
Here is more discussion of this
http://wapedia.mobi/en/History_of_British_nationality_law#3
To ignore the fact that a bigamous marriage has an effect on the analysis borders on malpractice.