Did the Courts have these documents depicting the Founders meaning and understanding naturels means natural born?
Posted on 06/22/2010 3:40:28 PM PDT by bushpilot1
They knew, we know, and Obama knows. He is just committed to the destruction of this Republic.
“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man.” Samuel Adams
“The liberties of our Country, the freedom of our civil constitution are worth defending at all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have receiv’d them as a fair Inheritance from our worthy Ancestors: They purchas’d them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood; and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us without a struggle; or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men.” - Samuel Adams
Yeah. It’s stunning that a “conservative” would think that the old dudes that had just fought a bloody, horrible war, would let someone with divided loyalties be elected President. My hubby, who hasn’t ever been on these threads, just said that Juan and Conchitas baby is NOT an NBC. He went to school when you atually were taught truth.
This is my line of reasoning: The Constitution was modified to allow this rule of citizenship by place of birth. The law has been clearly codified by Congressional action. The Supreme Court has upheld this interpretation</>LOL....actually LMFAO....you’re an amature....you need some serious catching up to do.
LOL....actually LMFAO....you're an amature....you need some serious catching up to do.
But why people who supposedly consider themselves conservatives don’t want to know the truth is what boggles my mind.
Did the Courts have these documents depicting the Founders meaning and understanding naturels means natural born?
You are sad. Don’t bother reading the decisions in the Ark case, it will just make you depressed and remove you from your silly little fantasy world where Vattel wrote the Constitution.
Once again - in your translation, “natural born” is translating “indigenes”, not “naturels”.
The document you discovered translates “sujets naturels” as natural born subjects - which would enforce the idea of common law “natual born subjects”, since otherwise it would translate to “natural subjects”. The ‘born’ comes from the phrase in English common law.
In other words, you’ve shown nothing useful to your case. You have shown that English common law was the source of their thinking...
You are ignoring the fact that the Constitution uses the phrase “Natural Born Citizen” ONLY for the President. It is crystal clear that “Natural Born Citizen” means something OTHER and MORE than a regular old citizen.
It’s patently obvious. Maybe you’re too smart to see it, it’s clear as a bell to most people who look into it in any depth whose minds aren’t made up beforehand.
No, not sad in the sense that I have lost an argument to you, sad for my Country and those of your ilk who show up to defend a POS like bammie yes.
Let me give you some advice, go ACTUALLY READ WKA, DIGEST THE WORDS and comprehend them.......then get back to us.
You mean did the court 112 years ago have documents from 229 years ago? I’m pretty sure they did. (By the way 1781 was 6 years before Madison wrote the Constitution, I’m pretty sure he had the documents as well. I guess he could have added the language in the Constitution if he had wanted to... but he didn’t, did he?)
“If you are born in the United States, and you are subject to the laws of the United States, you ARE a natural born citizen.”
Not true. You are completely wrong. Sorry, nice try.
Using only the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Code, Supreme Court decisions, or treaties, please show me how I'm wrong.
The Founders translated naturels to natural born. There is a difference. Naturels to the Founders did not mean simply the word natural..to them the term mean natural born. Common Law has nothing to do with their understanding of its meaning.
Good to see you here, Jeff Head!!! (I trust you are feeling much better, thank God.)
I just shake my head at conservatives that think the children of foreigners can be President. It’s the same view as the left that wants to destroy America.
One Worlders.
The founders did not encode that into the Constitution nor into the U.S. Code while they were alive. Since they were so precise in their language (particularly Madison), I find it odd that they did not make explicit in the Constitution nor in their writings.
What was encoded in the Constitution in plain language was the Fourteenth Amendment.
I find it odd that people want to scry out Vattel in a miasmic mix of translations, nuances and subtleties with the phrase “natural born citizen”, and yet they discount the very plain language in the fourteenth amendment.
Conservatives should know better than to try to make words and phrases mean what they want them to mean and ignore plain language when it is evident.
The document presented was from the French Foreign Minister on behalf of His Most Christian Majesty. The document was not from the English King.
The document has nothing to do with English Common Law. You are spinning your nonsense again and again to no avail.
This is clear documentation the Founders meant naturels to mean natural born.
Vattel said the naturels (natural born) are born to citizen parents.
Which means they are NOT conservatives.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.