Posted on 09/03/2013 10:18:04 AM PDT by Lakeshark
Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution provides, in pertinent part:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
**snip**
This political season, the eligibilities of Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal and Ted Cruz are the subject of debate.
As much as we want certainty, the term “natural born Citizen” is not defined in the Constitution, in the writings or history of those who framed the Constitution, or in a demonstrable common and clear understanding in the former British colonies at the time the Constitution was drafted. Nor has the Supreme Court ever ruled on the issue, it probably never will.
The modifier “natural born” is not used anywhere else in the Constitution, and its precise origins are unclear, although it is assumed to be derived in some manner from the British common and statutory law governing “natural born Subjects.” **snip**
want to go on record again objecting to the term “birther.” If the term were confined to conspiracy theorists, that would be one thing. But it has become a tool to shut down even legitimate debate.
The term was used as a pejorative as part of a deliberate Obama campaign strategy to shut down debate on his issues **snip**
5. The Framers never expressed what “natural born Citizen” meant **snip**
6. “natural born Citizen” usage at the time of drafting the Constitution is uncertain **snip**
7. British common and statutory law doesn’t solve the problem **snip**
8. There Is No Requirement That Both Parents Be Citizens
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
I can empathasize with patriots who want a conservative hero in the Oval Office who will lead the country. After all, most patriots grew up under our unconstitutionally big federal government and consequently think that it is normal, “American,” for Congress and the Oval Office to regulate so many aspects of our lives.
And even though I am a strict constitutionalist, I will reluctantly support whatever non-qualified conservative candidate for the Oval Office that Obama guard dog Fx News chooses for conservatives for the 2016 presidential race. This is because, although the federal government’s constitutionally-limited powers are easy enough for most people to understand, the problem is the following.
The consequence of many patriots having been taught what are actually perversions of the Constitution makes the RE-learning curve for understanding the federal government’s limited powers difficult and time-consuming. So it’s probably going to take many election cycles before patriots get a grip on the idea that the Oval Office is actually far from being the most powerful office in the land as the pro-OWG Progressive Movement would like everybody to think.
” the birthers have lost every battle they have fought to try to prove that Obama is not an nbC. He is.”
NO.........he is not a NBC. A foreign sovereignty governed his birth status.
I have watched that video before and it makes more sense to me by far than any other version of reality I have heard concerning what NBC means. “Natural born” is a term I used to hear in other contexts when I was young and it was understood to mean that if you were for instance, “A natural born killer”, you could never NOT be a killer, that is what you were born to be and you could not be otherwise even if you wanted to with all your being. Apply that idea to citizenship and it rules out anyone who might have some possibility of being something other than an American citizen AT BIRTH. That would mean someone born to two American citizen parents and subject to American jurisdiction from birth, not someone who might have some claim to citizenship in another country.
The only thing with which I disagree in your post is “May God save America.” America turned away from God. It is not up to Him to save us. It is up to us to turn back to Him or accept His judgement.
Sorry sir, you are incorrect. It was replaced with another act of Congress. The Naturalization Act of 1790 was replaced by the Naturalization Act of 1795 which was replaced by the Naturalization Act of 1798. So on and so forth.
That is how Congress expresses its will and exercises it enumerated power (Article I Section 8) to define the rules of naturalization - by passing acts that either replace or amend existing law.
If he doesn't judge America, he owes Sodom and Gomorrah an apology.
I'm glad you passed on your information, I'm sure he will think about it.
If you haven't followed his blog, it's so good I think even humblegunner might approve......uh oh, now I've done it.......I can hear the charge of "blogpimp" thown at me resonating across the interwebs........:-)
“That would mean someone born to two American citizen parents and subject to American jurisdiction from birth, not someone who might have some claim to citizenship in another country.”
Correct.
I hope there are at least ten in the US......
"..... because I want it to be that way; that works for me." Birthers are not nuts, and Obama is not NBC, that is why all the pettifogging, lying, and concealment.
Occam's Razor.
It's one thing for someone who has made no public statements regarding whether a person must be born in the country to citizen parents to publicly support for President someone who does not meet that standard. But that is not my situation.
Believe me, I think Senator Cruz is one of the best Senators currently in office, and would make a great President. But I cannot publicly support him without (rightly) being labeled a hypocrite. That's water under the bridge at this point.
What I can do is keep my mouth shut. And that's what I'll do, at least here on FR.
Sorry to disappoint, but none of the three of them is NBC, and neither are my sister and I.
Sauce, gander, goose. "Who says A, must also say B." -- Wm. F. Buckley, Jr.
"Modernist" = "I want what I want when I want it"? (Apologies to Gilbert and Sullivan.)
Try reading it instead of criticizing first.
That is exactly what Barky's Stalinists and the Me-Too Wing of the PTB want.
Unclarity. Mud. Water. Stir.
They are enemies of truth and light, and they can't abide us continually pointing certain things out to people. Such as, that Leftists are liars and mass-murderers in every climate and generation, and that they lay waste everything they touch. Things like that.
What would change your mind about Cruz? Would a Constitutional Amendment revoking the NBC clause satisfy you?
Yes.
I may criticize any incorrect statement whenever and wherever it appears. I needn't show a hall pass endorsed by you, to the effect that I've read Blackstone in full, before venturing an opinion on the grounds hazarded by this or any other writer.
I think we are saying the same thing:
The 1790 Act was replaced by the 1795 Act which was itself replaced in 1798, again in 1802 but never again was the “natural born citizen” language from the 1795 Act repeated in any subsequent Act.
That language only lasted the 5 years of the 1790 Act coinciding with the “time of the adoption of the Constitution” per Article II.
My “dog in this hunt” settles on what I have previously communicated to Lakeshark:
As a parent, when your kids tell you, “everyone else is doing it”, what is your appropriate response?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.