Fair enough.
Please find the phrase natural born citizen in the closing paragraph of the decision.
The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties, were to present for determination the single question, stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative.
The fact the Minor decision, the co authors of the 14th amendment as well as those of the Civil Rights Act passed before it all said a natural born was 'born in the country of parents who are citizens' ran totally contray to Ark bothers you not at all?
----------
If I'm setting out to find out if something is A, I can do it by showing that they're B. The fact that I end by saying "...and therefore the subject is A" doesn't mean I didn't show they were B.
Well, yeah. You could have saved yourself some time and just said correlation doesn't mean causation.
What does that have to do with anything?
----
Maybe because they thought a grownup might want to become a citizen?
But we were talking a citizen AT BIRTH, not a citizen 'at grownup'.
It's not there. I know that already.
The fact the Minor decision, the co authors of the 14th amendment as well as those of the Civil Rights Act passed before it all said a natural born was 'born in the country of parents who are citizens' ran totally contray to Ark bothers you not at all?
No, they said someone 'born in the country of parents who are citizens' was a natural born citizen. That's not the same thing, so it's not contrary to Ark.
Well, yeah. You could have saved yourself some time and just said correlation doesn't mean causation.
What does that have to do with anything?
What I wrote has nothing to do with correlation. I'm sorry you didn't understand it. I wish I could draw it for you. Do you understand that "All B are A" is not a statement of correlation?
But we were talking a citizen AT BIRTH, not a citizen 'at grownup'.
You asked "why did they even bother with the naturalization process?" Naturalization applies to grownups, or at least not "at birth."