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

To: DoodleDawg
Not sure what you're asking. We have one code that defines natural-born citizen/citizen at birth. Why would we need another?

It's your question not mine. Your question is where is the code for NBC and I'm saying there is not one needed, as you acknowledged I'm not questioning whether they are, but whether they alone are.

So you acknowledge that they are but can't accept that there is not a law needed for them and because there is a law for all other types of citizenship we need one for the only obvious type.

397 posted on 11/18/2015 7:24:50 AM PST by GregNH (If you can't fight, please find a good place to hide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies ]


To: GregNH
So you acknowledge that they are but can't accept that there is not a law needed for them and because there is a law for all other types of citizenship we need one for the only obvious type.

No, what I'm not accepting is your position that citizens at birth and natural-born citizens are somehow different. If one is a citizen at birth then they don't need to be naturalized and are therefore what the Constitution calls natural-born citizens. If the Constitution identifies a third class of citizenship then I'm not finding it.

399 posted on 11/18/2015 7:56:33 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | 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