[kevkrom]

I have always considered myself and my brother as a ‘citizen’ at birth by being born in the USA. We even went to war in WWII as ‘citizens’ in which my brother was killed on Okinawa. However, I never considered myself or my brother as ‘natural born(USA) citizens’ because our parents as immigrants were not naturalized citizens. I have no problem with recognizing the unique attribute of ‘natural born’ citizen not applying to either my brother or myself even though as a second grader I had thoughts of being POTUSA.

No offense, but what you consider is irrelevant. You are talking about an extra-legal and extra-Constitutional test that is not supported by anything other than personal interpretation.

Now, as far as deciding whether or not to vote for a particular individual, you are quite welcome to apply any test you like - in that capacity, you may discriminate on any factor you like, whether it is on a Vattel-style "natural born citizen" definition, race, religion, political views, marital status, hair style, you name it. As an individual you're perfectly free to base your vote any anything. But none of that matters to legal eligibility.

[noinfringers2]

What I think and believe is relevant to me and perhaps to others who have commented. To you what I think and believe is not relevant and so be it; neither you or I make up the universe.