“No, the 14th Amendment did not effect the meaning and intent behind the US Constitutional natural born citizen clause”
No, it didn’t. But you’re still wrong, because the natural born citizen clause does not mean what you think it means. The 14th amendment established what it meant to be a citizen at birth (born on U.S. soil subject to the jurisdiction of U.S. law), and natural born citizens are citizens at birth.
Therefore, even if George Washington thought only the children of two citizens could be natural born citizens because only the children of two citizens at that time could be born citizens, the 14th amendment proved him wrong by changing what constituted a citizen from birth.
The founding fathers didn't believe they were natural born citizens of these United States as they wrote in the grandfather clause to modify the natural born citizen clause so they could become president. The natural born citizen clause is directly referencing natural law and not positive law. The 14th Amendment is positive law, and so therefore the 14th amendment had no effect on the natural born citizen clause or did it change the meaning or intent to who are natural born citizens.
There is no need for man made laws for any nation's natural born citizens since they are from birth as no other nation can claim them as their citizen because of jus sanguinis foreign citizen laws. The NBC clause was written in the US Constitution as a safe guard to prevent would be presidents to have other foreign allegiances like Obama has. US president are to only have an allegiance to the United States.