Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Steel

“The Constitution leaves no room for doubt upon this subject. The words ‘natural born citizen of the United states’ appear in it, and the other provision appears in it that, “Congress shall have power to pass a uniform system of naturalization.” To naturalize a person is to admit him to citizenship. Who are natural born citizens but those born within the Republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural born citizens.”


100 posted on 07/18/2012 12:32:45 PM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: Conscience of a Conservative

Hey CON CON, you quoting that idiotic Ankeny Indiana court ruling? LoL.

I notice that you liberals always avoid the threads of Obama being a total fraud, but always glum on these NBC type threads to BS the facts.


102 posted on 07/18/2012 12:39:56 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]

To: Conscience of a Conservative

“Who are natural born citizens but those born within the Republic?”

“You start off semi~OK, but.....”Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth—natural born citizens.”

......then go to heck in a hurry! (what’s race got to do with anything???....and what about yellow, red, and brown skin?) Citizen at birth does not always equal Natural Born Citizen. It’s not a matter of law, the Founders did not coin the term, it’s a matter of language. The Founders used a term in common 18th century political lexicon.....

Question??? If all born citizens are “natural born citizens” why even use that term? Why use the word “Natural?” Why not just say born citizens? I think you are missing something here....and it looks like a very large pink elephant sitting in the middle of the parlor.

Don’t you find it curious that a book by Vittel, that is documented to have been in the Founders possession, uses and defines that exact term, “Natural Born Citizen,” and the author gives a rational explaination why they, the NBCs, those “born in a country to citizen parents,” are the very foundation of any society?

Explain how the Founders could think it unnecessary for the President of the new nation they were forming,to be a NBC, a term that they read in “Natural Law...The Law of Nations” and the exact term they used in writting Article II’s eligibility requirements? If the Founders definition of NBC was different than Vittel’s, why didn’t they define it in the text of Art II to avoid confussion to the common definition of the term?

Ponder this.... “All natural born citizens are born citizens, but not all born citizens are natural born citizens.......” Comment?


132 posted on 07/18/2012 2:08:49 PM PDT by Forty-Niner (The barely bare, berry bear formerly known as..........Ursus Arctos Horribilis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson