Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Forty-Niner

“As far as Article II eligibility requirements for holding the office of President, requiring that a candidate be born in the country to citizen parents”

It says no such thing. It simply says a president must be natural born. It did not define the term. Legislation establishes how citizenship is gained, in effect defining the terms the constitution used.


102 posted on 05/21/2013 11:34:45 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: DesertRhino

NBC is a quality of born citizenship. NBC had a well known and accepted definition in the western world of the 1700s, 1800s and 1900’s. It is only in the early 2000’s, in an attempt to qualify an ineligible candidate by muddying the waters, has the definition of the term come to question in popular circles with mounds of misinformation abounding.

Ask yourself the question of why Nancy Pelosi felt it necessary to delete the Phrase “....meets the Constitutional requirements...” to “...is the Democrat Party candidate for..” in certifying Obama in the 2008 election to the SOSs of all 50 states??? It’s the 59 million dollar answer to the question....

The Founders did not coin the term as it has existed since Roman times with varying definitions, nor did they feel the need to define a term already understood and defined in 1700s texts. Congress has nothing to do with it at all, unless it is to amend the Constitution and change the requirements of Article II.

NBC... the definition of is, is.....


118 posted on 05/21/2013 12:15:44 PM PDT by Forty-Niner ( the barely bare, berry bear formally known as Ursus Arctos Horibilis...Hear me roar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

To: DesertRhino
Legislation establishes how citizenship is gained, in effect defining the terms the constitution used.

Until Legislation controls the laws of nature, this assertion will remain untrue.

It is CRAZY to believe that congress has the power to re-write the meaning of terms in the US Constitution. All other topics aside, why on God's Earth would you even WANT that?

132 posted on 05/21/2013 12:47:35 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

To: DesertRhino

I never wrote the words you quoted......

Article II requires that a President be 35 years old, resided in the US for 14 years, and be Natural Born Citizen.

The Founders did not coin the term “Natural Born Citizen.” The term itself had been in use in Western culture for hundreds of years. They chose to use that specific term in writing Article II to exclude those not so born.

As the 18th Century accepted definition of NBC was born in a country to citizen parents, those lacking that quality were excluded from the Office of the President with the exception of those citizens that had been born before the Constitution was written, because it is impossible for someone to have had citizen parents before the establishment of the US as a Nation. (They chose not to wait 35+ years before installing someone as President.)

The USSC, which is the final arbitrator of US law, has always held the those who were born in the US to citizen parents were the Natural born Citizens of the US. It has never used that term (NBC) in conjunction with those born under circumstances not meeting that definition. They have accepted as born citizens people that did not meet the NBC standard but were born under specific other circumstances...In doing so the courts have been careful not to establish “classes” of citizenship where the rights of those citizens were different than those of other citizens. We must be aware that NBC has no application in the US except in qualifying to be President.

My statements that

“All NBCs are born citizens, but not all born citizens are Natural Born Citizens” stands.

Obama, Jindal, Rubio, and Cruz do not meet the definition of Natural Born Citizen and therefore none of them are eligible to hold the office of President of the US. Are these men citizens? Probably, because of various applications of law, but they are most certainly not Natural Born Citizens as envisioned by the 18th century Founders and US law.


186 posted on 05/21/2013 5:19:29 PM PDT by Forty-Niner ( the barely bare, berry bear formally known as Ursus Arctos Horibilis...Hear me roar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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