As a general matter, I'd agree. I'm simply pointing that that the question of how the Constitution was construed when written begs the question of "construed by whom?"
Scalia, for example would say "construed by those who ratified it", which I think is correct. The subjective intent of those who drafted it doesn't matter because drafting alone has no legal significance.
I have done some research on those who ratified it. I wanted to see if any of them had anything to say about what "natural born citizen" meant.
I found out some of them did, and they did not go along with the modern interpretation. If you want some names, I will have to look them up again. Fortunately I saved some of the names on the Vattel research thread.
Samuel Roberts, who wrote the book I mentioned above, was the apprentice of one of the ratifiers in the Pennsylvania legislature. I forget his name at the moment.
But I have to ask you, given that Philadelphia was the site of the convention and the US Capitol at the time, who would know better what was meant than a bunch of Philadelphia lawyers who were there at the time?