Suppose someone is in orbit when they are born, flying over this and that land willy nilly. How do you know what land they happen to be over when they are counted as "born"?The easy answer is to tell you that i will cross that bridge when it appears before me because I know that it never will. For the benefit of those of you who will probably live longer than me, I will suggest that the answer to your question may depend on whether the space ship is American space ship. I know that the United States can prosecute an American who murders another American aboard an American ship even if that ship is moored on the Congo River at the time of the murder. United States v. Flores. So, if the space ship is American, it may not matter what country it was over at the moment of birth.
The only knowable thing about a child, of which no other circumstances of birth are known is it's parentage. You can know this because it can be established with positive proof through DNA testing.
Yes, you can now, but that certainly was not true when the Constitution was written so it might not provide us with any help in determining how the Founders wanted to define natural born citizen. Determining a person's mother was usually pretty straightforward, but the identity of fathers was always a very iffy proposition. And, remember, the question does not even become important until at least 35 years after birth. There are a lot of people who believe that the definition of a word in the Constitution became fixed at the outset and is unchangeable.
As to Aristotle, it seems that he believed that the meaning of citizenship varied with different forms of government. I am not sure that he had had any experience of representative governments such as is contemplated by our Constitution. And, then, of course, if we are searching for the intent of the Founders, then his opinions might not be too important.
But, whatever works for others is fine with me. I am sticking with natural born citizen = citizen at birth.
The easy answer is to tell you that i will cross that bridge when it appears before me because I know that it never will. For the benefit of those of you who will probably live longer than me, I will suggest that the answer to your question may depend on whether the space ship is American space ship. I know that the United States can prosecute an American who murders another American aboard an American ship even if that ship is moored on the Congo River at the time of the murder. United States v. Flores. So, if the space ship is American, it may not matter what country it was over at the moment of birth. How about you don't know what space ship it is? How about it is an alien space ship? If you are going to be silly, I can be silly too. The point is, the ownership of the ship is immaterial to the inherent status of the person involved. Having only the knowledge of the person, what can you say about their status? In a natural state, the parents will claim their child, whether they know who owned the ship, or over what land it was on at the time.
Determining a person's mother was usually pretty straightforward, but the identity of fathers was always a very iffy proposition.
The English Common law rule is that any children of the marriage are regarded as children of the Husband, regardless of who is the actual father. Kinda silly, but that was the best they could do with the information they had to work with.
There are a lot of people who believe that the definition of a word in the Constitution became fixed at the outset and is unchangeable.
Short of an amendment, yes. That is exactly as it should be. It should be difficult to make changes, and changes should only come with the consent of the governed. We have seen what 75 years later have brought after the appointment of all those liberal Roosevelt judges. They redefine not only words, but entire meanings and intentions.
Who at the time would have ever conceived of the possibility that the 14th amendment would not only give us Abortion and Anchor babies, but "Gay marriage"?
I am not sure that he had had any experience of representative governments such as is contemplated by our Constitution. And, then, of course, if we are searching for the intent of the Founders, then his opinions might not be too important.
Why absolutely. The founders likely never heard of Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, or any of those old Greeks. They weren't at all very educated about such things you know.
But, whatever works for others is fine with me. I am sticking with natural born citizen = citizen at birth.
Well sure you can do that. You can believe anything you like despite evidence that it is not true. You may be perfectly happy with a definition that changes requirements every time congress farts, but as for me, I regard it as nonsensical and dangerous, because if the meaning and the intent of the US Constitution can be modified by congressional statute, then the amendment process is effectively irrelevant.
Someone has cut the control lines of this aircraft we are flying. It doesn't respond to helm.
Oh, and while i'm at it, I thought I would give you some more consternation from Thomas Jefferson.
Here is an excerpt from a letter he wrote to John Jay.
Paris, November 14, 1788.
With respect to the consular appointments, it is a duty on me to add some observations, which my situation here has enabled me to make. I think it was in the spring of 1784, that Congress (harassed by multiplied applications from foreigners, of whom nothing was known but on their own information, or on that of others as unknown as themselves) came to a resolution, that the interest of America would not permit the naming any person not a citizen, to the office of consul, vice-consul, agent, or commissary. This was intended as a general answer to that swarm of foreign pretenders. It appears to me, that it will be best, still to preserve a part of this regulation. Native citizens, on several valuable accounts, are preferable to aliens, and to citizens alien-born.
Native citizens are preferable to citizens "alien-born"?
Wow. It sounds like ole T.J. doesn't regard them as the same thing. Funny that. Didn't he write that thing which created US Citizenship?
Maybe he should have had you around to explain it to him.