[DiogenesLamp]

As far as I know, what you are saying has absolutely no legal validity. If “condition” vs. “title” is a legal issue, please link to where I can read about the law in this area.

You have to read a piece of law to understand common sense? I begin to see what your difficulty is. :)

If an animal is born as a Sheep, no act of congress will cause it to be a Horse. Congress may CALL it a "Horse" but it will remain a Sheep. The Supreme Court may Decree that it is a "Horse" but it is still a sheep. Congress may pass a law which says that all dictionaries must hereafter describe the animal which is currently known as a sheep, as a Horse, but this is just games with words, similar to what your side tries to do with the words "natural born citizen."

Congress could call anyone born in January a "natural born citizen" but it would not be correct or accurate.

[sometime lurker]

You have to read a piece of law to understand common sense? I begin to see what your difficulty is. :) If an animal is born as a Sheep, no act of congress will cause it to be a Horse. Congress may CALL it a "Horse" but it will remain a Sheep. The Supreme Court may Decree that it is a "Horse" but it is still a sheep. Congress may pass a law which says that all dictionaries must hereafter describe the animal which is currently known as a sheep, as a Horse, but this is just games with words, similar to what your side tries to do with the words "natural born citizen."

And this is where your disdain for legal matters becomes clear. Like any discipline, there are meanings to certain words inside the discipline that are not the same as they are in common use. If you are claiming a specific legal meaning, link or cite. If you are trying to use your "common sense" idea of what they mean, that is not binding on the law.