>>> We have never followed the idea that parentage determines citizenship,
Then why was citizenship of McCain’s parents examined in the 2008 hearing?
>>> How loyal are those two NBCs?
Oh.. so we should just ignore the constitution because it’s not sufficient to protect us from these people?
It is the RULE OF LAW that is under attack here.
Obama was cherry picked for this position precisely because he is not a NBC... to UNDERMINE the constitution.
Your arguments validate their objectives.
i.e. Oh well.. it doesn’t matter... its outdated.. antiquated... no longer needed.... so lets JUST IGNORE IT!
“Then why was citizenship of McCain’s parents examined in the 2008 hearing?”
Because there is a dispute over whether or not the term natural born citizen applies to someone born outside the country. The first Congress said it applied to those born of two citizen parents outside the country, but there was a disagreement about that. That disagreement was never fully settled.
Since McCain was born outside the country, it was important that both his parents be US citizens. If not, then all would agree he was NOT a natural born citizen.
The term used in the Constitution wasn’t picked out of thin air. It was a standard legal term, with a meaning established in English common law. The lawyers at the Constitutional Convention all knew what it meant. That was why they didn’t try to define it - because they already KNEW what it meant.
In the years prior to the Constitution, the term was already being used by the states to describe what they were doing. It was the American version of ‘natural born subject’, revised to have citizens living in a republic. But the term was not pulled out of thin air.
And no, the legal meaning did not require two citizen parents. Sorry. You are wrong.