[DiogenesLamp]

Prove it, in context.

How much time do you want to spend on it?

Don't cherry pick your proof like most do on this issue.

How about this? Let us first agree as to who would be most in a position to know the correct answer to the "natural born citizen" question.

I argue that only the Delegates to the US Constitutional convention, and the subsequent ratifiers in the State ratifying conventions, knew exactly what it was that they intended with that article II provision. (i.e. the Lawmakers.)

I argue that any statements by actual Delegates or Ratifying legislators, constitute the best actual authority regarding what was their intentions in passing that requirement.

I further argue, that any citation of authority ought to demonstrate some linkage to the delegates or ratifying legislatures, or it can only be regarded as merely hearsay from people who were not there.

Do these seem like agreeable terms to you?

[SoConPubbie]

I argue that only the Delegates to the US Constitutional convention, and the subsequent ratifiers in the State ratifying conventions, knew exactly what it was that they intended with that article II provision. (i.e. the Lawmakers.) I argue that any statements by actual Delegates or Ratifying legislators, constitute the best actual authority regarding what was their intentions in passing that requirement.

I further argue, that any citation of authority ought to demonstrate some linkage to the delegates or ratifying legislatures, or it can only be regarded as merely hearsay from people who were not there.

I'd be agreeable to your stipulations if it led to any proof from the US Constitution, US Law, and/or Supreme Court Ruling that corroborates your understanding of what it means to be Eligible to be President of the US.

However, as with all those who remain adamant that it requires 2 citizen parents at time of birth for a citizen to be eligible to be President, you will attempt to use authorities outside of the current US Constitution, US Law, and/or US Supreme Court Ruling to establish your definition as correct.

But in real terms, the only things that count are the Current US Constitution, current US Law, and/or Current US Supreme Court rulings.

Everything else is immaterial, no matter how correct you believe you are in your opinion. Anything outside of those authorities have no bearing, no strength in determining whether or not someone like Senator Cruz is eligible to be President.

Now, if a challenge ever made it to the Supreme Court, your outside list of authorities might be taken into consideration(dependent on the politicization of the court case), but only in the context of the current, not in the context of the founding of the country.

Outside authorities were meant to provide a basic framework, not to act as the AUTHORITY for our laws. Our Constitution, our laws are the authority, not the other way around. No one is going to throw you into prison because you violated some idea from an outside authority. Violate one of our laws, however, and that's where the authority comes into play.