Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

To: Jeff Winston

What part of “to ourselves and our Posterity” in the Preamble to the United States Constitution do you fail to understand?

At its foundation the term Natural Born Citizen points directly to the properties of blood and soil. That is, one is born in the borders of our country (soil) and born of American Citizen parents (blood).

By its very definition, the term foreign denotes a lack of blood or soil connection to a country.

Any argument that advocates for a U.S. President who lacks a blood or soil connection to this country is actually advocating for a foreign Presidency.


218 posted on 03/15/2013 6:49:53 PM PDT by joseph20 (...to ourselves and our Posterity...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]


To: joseph20
At its foundation the term Natural Born Citizen points directly to the properties of blood and soil. That is, one is born in the borders of our country (soil) and born of American Citizen parents (blood).

No, it doesn't, Joseph.

The term came directly and absolutely from the term "natural born subject," which had a long and well-known history, and a very specific meaning.

According to the natural (and divine) law of England, if you were born within a realm, you were "naturally" a part of that realm. It made no difference whether your parents were citizens or legal aliens.

The only exceptions were the children of foreign royalty/ ambassadors, and the children of invading armies.

We adopted the exact same rule. And as the Supreme Court specifically said in 1898, that rule applied in England, in the English Colonies in America, in the United States after Independence, and in the United States after the establishment of our Constitution.

But it's not just the word of the Supreme Court. All of our prior history and law backs that assessment.

220 posted on 03/15/2013 8:13:00 PM PDT by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]

To: joseph20
What part of “to ourselves and our Posterity” in the Preamble to the United States Constitution do you fail to understand?

At its foundation the term Natural Born Citizen points directly to the properties of blood and soil. That is, one is born in the borders of our country (soil) and born of American Citizen parents (blood).

By its very definition, the term foreign denotes a lack of blood or soil connection to a country.

Any argument that advocates for a U.S. President who lacks a blood or soil connection to this country is actually advocating for a foreign Presidency.

One of the most amusing things about Jeff's position is that he is advocating so strongly for the Usage of English Law in deciding the eligibility of our Chief Executive, all the while not realizing that not even the English use this method for determining the eligibility of their own.

You cannot become King of England merely by being born in England. For that matter, it doesn't really even matter where you are born. It isn't germane to the King's eligibility. The ONLY thing which matters regarding a King's eligibility is blood.

Jeff Keeps demanding we adhere to a policy which not even the English use!

229 posted on 03/17/2013 10:06:01 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson