[Mr Rogers]

(page 246)
And the constitution itself contains a direct recognition of the subsisting common law principle, in the section which defines the qualification of the President. “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” &c. The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not.

(pg 250)
6. Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen.

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/Lynch_v_Clarke_1844_ocr.pdf

[CWW]

You got it. Natural born merely means "native born" as opposed to someone born outside the U.S. And becomes a citizen later.

You can have two foreign born parents as long as they are not diplomats and still be a U.S. Citizen if you are born on U.S. Soil. This was the English common law adopted 2 centuries ago by the U.S.

[TigersEye]

Note to the forum: I already called Mr Rogers on this obvious omission earlier but he ignored me and continues to post this drivel.

(pg 250)
6. Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever were the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen.”

It is interesting that you omitted the sentence that immediately follows that statement.

"It is surprising that there has been no judicial decision upon this question."