Birthright citizenship did not arise from 14A. It started in the colonies with English common law and was carried forth into the States.Well we disagree on that point. English common law was the source for "Subject" status, but natural law is the source for "Citizen" status.
And you have a constitutional right to disagree, and to present your ridiculously wrong mutterings over and over and over. If birthright citizenship were not the law today, you would not be complaining about its self-evident existence.
Wong Kim Ark at 169 U.S. 649, 658-59:
It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.
Wong Kim Ark at 169 U.S. 649, 662-63:
In United States v. Rhodes (1866), Mr. Justice Swayne, sitting in the Circuit Court, said: "All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. . . . We find no warrant for the opinion that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution."
The 14th naturalizes babies at birth.
As previously explained, this is just bullshit, in direct conflict with the legal definition of naturalization. Read it again for the umptgeenth time:
Public Law 414
66 STAT 163, 169
June 27, 1952
(23) The term "naturalization" means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.
Only aliens, lawfully present in the United States, are eligible for naturalization. It is legally impossible for anyone to be naturalized "at birth." Naturalization is only available after birth, for those having been born as aliens.
Well you have not yet demonstrated that it is wrong.