http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams145.htm
NATURAL BORN FOLLOWS THE NATURAL BIRTH FATHER
By J.B. Williams
April 19, 2011
NewsWithViews.com
Why is Trump asking where the birth certificate
is when Obama has already admitted to not being a
natural born citizen of the United States?
The Founders borrowed the term natural born
citizen from the international treatise known as
the Law of Nations, which appears in the U.S.
Constitution under Article I and the enumerated
powers of congress to enforce violations against the Law of Nations.
To be a natural born citizen of the United
States, one must be the blood offspring of a
father who was at the time of birth, a legal U.S.
citizen. Emerich de Vattel wrote in 1758, the
following definition of natural born citizen and
every member of the U.S. Supreme Court know this
definition well… it’s not at all complicated.
1) natural-born citizens, are those born in the
country, of parents who are citizens.
2) those children naturally follow the condition
of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
3) The country of the fathers is therefore that
of the children; and these become true citizens
4) in order to be of the country, it is necessary
that a person be born of a father who is a
citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner,
it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
Forget “where’s the birth certificate”
The proper question is – WHO’S YOUR DADDY?
-snip-
The mere fact that a POTUS with an ALIAS has not been vetted in the news is stunning to say the least. Where are the documents that show he is no longer Barry Soetoro the muslim boy? He supposedly tought law. Where are his grades? Does he still hold a law license? And how can MSM intro him with chants like he is a savior good guy when he knocked his opponents names off the ballots in his first election? The media told all we were getting a black Jesus not a corrupt Chicago politician with no scruples whatsoever.
You obviously don’t know much about the laws of bastardy.
Until 1973, when the USSC (same Court, same term as Roe v. Wade) ruled bastardy laws violated the Fourteenth Amendment, inheritance, natality, and citizenship were all different for bastards than for legitimate children.
It’s perfectly clear that Stanley Ann Dunham was not married to the sperm donor, whoever that might have been.
As such, her child was legally a bastard the day he was born. And, according to the common law, the British Nationality Act of 1948, and the US Naturalization Act of 1952, bastards have no fathers.
So, it is of no importance who the biological father was. He could not have been the legal father under any circumstances. What country he was a citizen of is of no significance. He had no legal existence in the life of Stanley Ann Dunham’s child, he could not have transmitted nationality or citizenship, and that child could not have inherited anything from him (as we know, in fact, BHO did not).