One is either born, and via that natural act, has citizenship under natural law - and is thus a “natural born citizen” - or one must go through a legal process to confer what nature did not - they mus be “natural-IZED” into citizenship.
There are only two ways of becoming a U.S. citizen - and it makes sense to me that there are correspondingly two types of citizens of these United States - those who are natural born citizens - and those who had to be natural-IZED.
What I think most amazing is how people will repeatedly post the claim that a “natural born citizen” must be born in the country to two citizens, as if this claim is an undisputed fact.
I’m perfectly willing to agree that the issue has never been definitively settled, due to a failure by the Court to rule on the issue. My reading of the various Court decisions that bear on the case lead me to have a real good idea that if the Court were to rule it would agree with you and me.
But I still don’t post my opinion as if it were a fact.
I strongly suspect that if the Court were to rule agreeing with us, a lot of these fanatics on the issue would still refuse to accept the Court’s ruling as valid.
The whole thing reminds me of the “Why doth treason never prosper?” quote.
Even if the birthers are right legally and constitutionally, they have no mechanism by which they can impose their (correct) opinion on the rest of the country. So what is the point of agitating on the issue? Spend your efforts on defeating his reelection campaign.