I conceive that every person who owed this primary allegiance to the particular community in which he was born, retained his right of birth, as a member of a new community; that he was absolved from a secondary allegiance that he had owed to a British sovereign.
Let's go over that, word by word.
James Madison, Father of the Constitution.
The topic was CITIZENSHIP.
And Madison, the Father of Our Constitution, says:
EVERY PERSON (that is, every person born on American soil prior to the Revolution)
...who owed this primary allegiance to the particular community in which he was born, retained his right of birth, as a member of a new community;
So here Madison clearly says, just as I have just said, that EVERY PERSON BORN IN AMERICA BEFORE THE REVOLUTION HAD TWO ALLEGIANCES.
He had an allegiance "TO THE PARTICULAR COMMUNITY IN WHICH HE WAS BORN."
And he had an allegiance "TO A BRITISH SOVEREIGN."
And what does Madison say happened when we split from England?
He says that such people WHO RETAINED THEIR PRIMARY ALLEGIANCE TO THE COMMUNITY IN WHICH THEY WERE BORN WERE ABSOLVED FROM A SECONDARY ALLEGIANCE THAT THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY OWED TO THE KING.
What ELSE does he say happened?
He says that SUCH PEOPLE RETAINED THEIR BIRTHRIGHT.
And WHAT WAS THAT BIRTHRIGHT?
Remember that he is speaking in the context of Smith's eligibility, due to his CITIZENSHIP.
IT WAS THE BIRTHRIGHT OF MEMBERSHIP, BY BIRTH (REMEMBER THE WORD "BIRTHRIGHT?") IN THE COMMUNITY IN WHICH THEY WERE BORN.
In other words, such people were MEMBERS, or CITIZENS of those communities IN WHICH THEY WERE BORN.
Their PRIMARY ALLEGIANCE was TO THOSE COMMUNITIES.
Their SECONDARY ALLEGIANCE was to the King.
Thus their PRIMARY BELONGING was to those communities WHICH BECAME THE UNITED STATES.
James Madison, the Father of Our Constitution, says you're full of it.
People such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, born on American soil, retained their membership in the communities they were born in, which became the United States of America.
Because of this, they were considered NATURAL BORN CITIZENS of the United States.
And if you look at the reason WHY, historically, the grandfather clause was passed, it seems to be generally agreed that it wasn't for the sake of these people.
It was for the sake of folks like Alexander Hamilton and James Wilson.
In the Same manner that John Bingham disagrees with me. You are simply distorting Madison's point. Madison usage of the word "place" is not a simple geographic boundary. If it were, he would need add nothing to it.
But Madison goes on to explain what he meant by "place." He meant born to a long established family in a long established community, and therefore bound to that community by societal and familial bounds.
You are just leaving out Madison's version of "allegiance to no other sovereign", same as you did with Bingham. You are like a one trick pony in this regard.
I'm not going to bother addressing the rest of your verbiage. I am confident it too is crap.