That is an interesting question, surely not contemplated by the founders. I would say though, that while I am happy for you that you were able to have a child in this manner, we are not going to change over two hundred years of history for this unusual circumstance.
Although, I think a case could be made for that view.
“I defer to the constitutional scholars who also debate this subject.”
Why? Are they smarter than you? I don't think they are any smarter.
If you haven't seen this, you may find it interesting.
http://www.thebirthers.org/misc/logic.htm
I disagree with the analysis (and find it interesting that it is at a site called “birther.org”, since I have been attacked for using the term “birther”, and you will note I try very hard not to do so anymore).
Moreso, by the analysis, we have no need for Obama’s birth certificate, because we already KNOW that his father was Kenyan/British.
I simply don’t believe that natural-born requires that BOTH parents be citizens at the time of birth. Although I could make a better argument for the FATHER being american than the mother, since originally (as one of the quoted documents shows) it was the birthright of the FATHER that mattered.
I would accept Obama as not “natural-born” if he wasn’t born on U.S. soil (in which case he WOULD have to have two american parents, and be born on soil that was legitimately under control of the U.S., like a military base). I would accept he was not natural-born if his mother did not meet the qualifications for confering citizenship (there were rules regarding her time in the states that some suggested she didn’t meet).
That’s because while I agree with the argument as to why it was considered important to be a natural born citizen, I disagree with the application of the definition based on that consideration. A child born to an American mother, whose father is unknown, would certainly pass muster under the “don’t have any foreign allegiances” — how could a child with no knowledge of father have any allegiance to the unknown father’s unknown place of origin?
But more importantly, it is a known fact that Obama’s father was not American. That no successful challenge has been brought on that point shows that, regardless of personal opinion, the considered constitutional opinion of those that MATTER is that “natural-born” does not require both parents to be citizens.
Which is why the lawsuits are about seeing the birth certificate, in the hopes the certificate will show that Obama was born in another country.
Why bother, if settled law proved he wasn’t natural-born because of the father?