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.
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”?
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.
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.