True, but the constitution apparently didn't foresee Political Derangement Syndrome as it didn't set up a commission similar to the FEC called the BCEC (Birth Certificate Election Commission) to ride herd over this tragedy that has never before reared it's ugly head. This lack of foresight indicates that they believed Americans would settle these questions honorably and trust their candidates unless evidence could be produced to impeach their claim. The constitution also says America is a nation of laws and we settle these questions with lawsuits, not forums and blogs. There is no legal reason for Obama to turn over his birth certificate unless and until someone sues him. And maybe not even then.
I mentioned in an earlier post that no one questioned Ronald Reagan's citizenry. Simply because people were a bit more sane in 1980. Saying that someone "ought to be required to produce evidence" indicates is that one can start any issue they desire, and demand answers. I don't have any right to his birth certificate. As far as I'm concerned anyone running for president is eligible until someone proves different. That sounds somewhat familiar, kind of like innocent until proven guilty.
I'm much more interested in how this man plans to waste my money than his birth certificate. It is my opinion, and a very humble opinion at that, this is such a non issue we won't be seeing this in the court system anytime soon.
Your post to me makes too much sense for me to even consider arguing the point again.
Ronald Reagan served in the United States Army and supplied his Birth certificate prior to enlisting in April 29, 1937, hardly the Same thing as Obama who won’t supply his birth certificate to anyone.