Exactly, I agree with you and so does Leo:
"If Obama is eligible to be President then so are the sons of Osama Bin Laden, Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad if they impregnate an American woman who gives birth on US soil. The very notion is obscene. Such a person might be a US citizen under current policy, but their citizenship is not natural born and they cannot be President and Commander In Chief of the US armed forces."-----Leo Donofrio.
Reading the other thread about Chester Arthur, I found this post by GGMac:
How amazingly profound your statement is. You said, “Obama Sr. never intended to become a citizen of the US. His INTENT WAS ALWAYS TO GO BACK TO KENYA AND BE PART OF THE REVOLUTION there.” [caps for emphasis]And what, then, did Barry title his book? “Dreams From My Father”.
As in “dreams FROM my father”.
As in, Barry’s dream was/is to be the personification - the fulfillment - of his father’s dreams.
His father’s dream was for Kenya to be a Communist nation with a taxation rate of 100%.
And now, there sits Barry - in the Oval Office with his filthy shoes on the desk, honing his hammer and sickle.
Split loyalties indeed!. And it doesn’t matter [in this aspect] whether or not Sr. actually was his father. Barry has ideologically and emotionally proclaimed him to be his father and the source of whom and what he has chosen to be.
GGMac is spot on.....Exactly what the framers wanted to prevent. Adding Vattel and a few pictures to complete GGMac's excellent post :
Vattel in Bk 1 Sec 212, states the following.
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it.
The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born.
I say, that, in order to be of the country,it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
Is there any question why the founders put the Natural Born Citizen requirement clause in the Constitution?