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

To: Kansas58
My goodness. I guess we will have to school you. The reponse to your argument can be found directly in the Constitution itself. You do not have to go to case law to understand this response.

Pay close attention as I will only go over this once. Are you ready for a little grammatical magic?

 

Amendment XIV says:

All persons born or naturalized... are Citizens of the United States...

Article II, Section 1 says:

...Natural Born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President

Grammar Lesson:

Or is a coordinating conjunction that presents an alternative item or idea. One in place of another.

Are or Shall Be is a subject-verb agreement which means both subjects are essentially the same.

 

Let us complete the lesson by substitution:

...Natural Born Citizen, or a person born in the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.

...Natural Born Citizen, or a person naturalized in the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.

 

Your argument does not hold water.

 

406 posted on 02/02/2012 1:54:12 PM PST by devattel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies ]


To: devattel

What is with the comma after “United States” in Article II Section 1?

Wouldn’t good grammer indicate that it means:

“natural born Citizen at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution” Or “a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution”?


420 posted on 02/02/2012 3:23:46 PM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies ]

To: devattel

Why then, if my argument does not hold water (And your explanation was goofy at best) Why then, is it, that NOBODY IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION, NO IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS, NO ELECTED OFFICIALS and No real historians agree with you?

You are wrong.

You are all twisting yourself into knots trying to prove what you can’t prove.


422 posted on 02/02/2012 3:32:16 PM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies ]

To: devattel
Back to your complete drivel about grammar:

The Founders clearly allowed Naturalization PRIOR to adoption to be allowed for POTUS requirements, a point we need not worry about much, today, but the Founders clearly did not want Naturalization AFTER adoption of the Constitution, to qualify as a Natural Born Citizen.

You flunked. Your problem is that you figured out what you wanted PRIOR to doing any “research”.

You are biased and intellectually dishonest, and that is why you fail at debate.

515 posted on 02/02/2012 8:41:34 PM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | 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