“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens,as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.”
Doubts is not the same as a definitive ruling, no wonder you had to butcher the quote to try to get it to say what you wanted it to say!
Edge919 has had it pointed out to him, at least a dozen times, that the passage from the Minor decision, which he so loves to rip out of context, doesn't support his argument if read in in context.
And yet, he keeps posting, re-posting it, and posting it again, as if it were somehow definitive proof of his position.
I don't get it, edge. Why do you do this? Why do you keep quoting the same passage, over and over again, after having been shown many times that it doesn't support your argument?
Do you just enjoy being proved wrong again and again on the same point?