I've commented on this more elsewhere.
The main concern was with royalty from Europe swooping in and taking or. Or actually being invited, by some here, to come and take over (e.g., Prince Henry of Prussia, or the one Bishop in England who I think was one of the King's sons.
Whatever friendliness toward another country that the US-born child of non-citizen parents might have had towards the country of his parents' birth, the Founding Fathers don't seem to have ever felt that it was worth getting worked up about.
I've commented on this more elsewhere.
It is a stupid point. No one gives a rip about Honorary citizenship in another country. Two states gave the Marquis De La Fayette Honorary citizenship. Big whoop.
The argument that having honorary citizenship bestowed upon them would somehow make them subject to foreign influence in their own country is so laughable that one would have to be a fool to even consider it.
The main concern was with royalty from Europe swooping in and taking or. Or actually being invited, by some here, to come and take over (e.g., Prince Henry of Prussia, or the one Bishop in England who I think was one of the King's sons.
Most of Europe was subjected to leadership by Incestuous Royals who were constantly marrying this or that cousin. The Custom of obtaining favoritism for one's country by putting a member of it's Royal family into another country's Royal family was quite well known to the founders. They were having none of it. They wanted no one in Governance who had strong ties to another country, and they created Article II to accomplish this purpose.
And then people like you come along and undermine it with sophistry and bad authority.