Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers

<>Vattel wrote one sentence in a philosophy book, and that sentence did NOT include “natural born citizen”.<>

The English translation of 1759 did and Ramsay probably read it.

<>Few heard of Ramsay because he was a minor figure.<>

And you know that how??? Were you there, Chucky???

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/04/02/founder-and-historian-david-ramsay-defines-natural-born-citizen-in-1789/

<>The Supreme Court cases did NOT define NBC as requiring two citizen parents - the opposite if anything.<>

The obiter dicta of numerous courts has stated its meaning time after time — with nothing to the contrary.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/10/18/4-supreme-court-cases-define-natural-born-citizen/

And then there is this from somebody who should know:

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/04/10/lifelong-democrat-breckinridge-long-natural-born-citizen-means-born-on-the-soil-to-a-father-who-is-a-citizen/

And then that pesky Leahy and that SR511:

http://theobamafile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm#LeahyResolution

I prefer the evidence that we have for the historical traditional meaning of “natural born citizen” to the evidence to the contrary THAT YOU DON’T HAVE.


383 posted on 05/03/2010 9:23:45 AM PDT by Uncle Chip (TRUTH : Ignore it. Deride it. Allegorize it. Interpret it. But you can't ESCAPE it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 382 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Chip

“The English translation of 1759 did...”

No, it did not, and I’ve already posted the quote from the 1759 translation on this thread.

I wrote “Few heard of Ramsay because he was a minor figure.” He was. Not a bad guy, but not THE legal authority on the Constitution. Compared to him, we have James Madison’s comment on which is important for citizenship, birth or descent:

“It is an established maxim that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth however derives its force sometimes from place and sometimes from parentage, but in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States; it will therefore be unnecessary to investigate any other.”

James Madison, The Founders’ Constitution Volume 2, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 2, Document 6 (1789)

The link you provide on the Supreme Court is bogus. The cases cited do not show NBC requires 2 citizen parents, nor did they attempt to.

“And then that pesky Leahy and that SR511:”

Except that applies to someone BORN OUTSIDE THE USA - NOT someone born within the jurisdiction of the US...doesn’t it? It is dishonest to post that as evidence that a person born inside the USA needs to have 2 citizens for parents.

Your info is bogus, and that is why no court takes it seriously. When someone pretends one sentence, incorrectly translated AFTER the Constitution was written, is the end all of legal meaning for NBC, it is impossible to take them seriously.


385 posted on 05/03/2010 11:45:23 AM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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