I did no such dismissing out of hand.
The remainder of your ranting lecture isn't worth replying to, since it is the very same Constitution that empowers Congress to regulate, including enacting laws pertaining to citizenship (thus introduce changes and refinements) provided those changes do not run afoul of the Constitution.
If that not be so -- from where and when (what era?) are we to look towards in regards to codification of law regarding just about anything one can think of?
I probably won’t be around to worry about it, but this country needs to wake up and try to save what is left of the greatest nation that ever existed. The Constitution did pretty well in keeping us a strong country until the liberals started chipping away and destroying it. Now, the only thing that seems to matter is “feelings” and not “Facts.” You of course will make your own decision, but my grandchildren will have to pay the price of failure now to defend the Constitution from the “Living” Constitution enthusiasts.
You most certainly did dismiss out of hand the Law of Nations and Vattel when you stated “There are other antiquated notions, etc, etc,” Show some respect for the work of a brilliant Swiss expert on Law which was the absolute reference for our Constitution. It is neither “antiquated,” nor a “notion.”
The requirement that the president command in chief be natural born is a dictum which cannot be changed without an Article 5 Constitutional Convention and resulting referendum of the states. That’s just the way it is. Ignore it at your peril. Realize what it got us the last time it was ignored.