Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

“So in other words, not Congress. I didn’t bother to read anything after these words.”

Proof you are STUPID. Or a LIAR. Or both.

If one of the ratifying legislatures believed something, that something is worth knowing. They are one of the 13 legislatures that APPROVED the US Constitution, so what they thought they were approving is even more important than what someone believed they were writing.

“Since whether the Founders followed Vattel (they did, as is well proved already)”

You do not follow something that won’t be written for another 10 years, not unless you are a time traveler.

” makes no difference for Ted Cruz, who is invalidated by both standards”

Wrong again. As I have already pointed out, Parliament had the right to change the definition of NBS, and had done so multiple times in the 400 years prior to the Constitution. That means NBS was recognized as a term of law that could be adjusted by the legislature - and all the Founders KNEW it, since the most recent adjustments had come during the 1700s and affected all the law of the colonies.


80 posted on 01/12/2016 6:57:18 AM PST by Mr Rogers (Can you remember what America was like in 2004?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
If one of the ratifying legislatures believed something,

Taking a closer look at your irrelevant quotes, they don't even claim what you say they claim. The nation was just being birthed. Even the founding fathers-- not all of whom were born in the US-- were grandfathered in as natural born citizens by special act. It does not follow that anyone could be declared a "natural born citizen" by an act of congress. It would destroy its meaning.

Wrong again.

It's correct, as you admit in the next sentence by implication:

As I have already pointed out, Parliament had the right to change the definition of NBS,

In other words, you admit that when the Constitution was written, the definition of natural born citizen would have eliminated Cruz from the Presidency, just as I stated it did. Your argument, however, is that Congress can change the definition of natural born citizen, even though the Constitution gives them no such power to begin with. IOW, your argument is vain from the get go.

Just like how women needed a Constitutional amendment in order to gain the right to vote, a constitutional amendment is needed to change the definition of Natural Born citizen.

Proof you are STUPID. Or a LIAR. Or both.

Pffft, please, you're position is weak so you lash out. You are an imbecile.

81 posted on 01/12/2016 7:14:57 AM PST by Greetings_Puny_Humans (I mostly come out at night... mostly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson