“BS”
“Totally outlandish BS...”
Abusive fallacy – a subtype of “ad hominem” when it turns into verbal abuse of the opponent rather than arguing about the originally proposed argument.
Appeal to the stone (argumentum ad lapidem) – dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity.
Argument from (personal) incredulity (divine fallacy, appeal to common sense) – I cannot imagine how this could be true, therefore it must be false.[
Argumentum ad hominem – the evasion of the actual topic by directing an attack at your opponent.
“You really had to contort facts to come up with that shit.”
See above.
The definitions of naturalization and usage of datus and natus is a fact found in Coke, Edward, Sir. Selected Writings of Sir Edward Coke: Volume I. 1608. p. 206.
You may now apologize for the scatological insult and lie.
This crap was settled during the course of the 1st US Congress.
English law and it’s jurists or commentators has nothing to offer to the argument in any way, shape or form.
What you are arguing is in essence due to a time when citizenship was determined by the States. Citizenship had nothing to do at the time with the term natural born but if it were in effect, Cruz would be a citizen of Delaware.
Since it has not bearing on the argument, you need to refer to US statute and several SCOTUS cases affirming who is natural born.
Best described here, in the Harvard Law review by Legal scholars Paul Clement and Neal Katyal.
” No doubt informed by this longstanding tradition, just three years after the drafting of the Constitution, the First Congress established that children born abroad to U.S. citizens were U.S. citizens at birth, and explicitly recognized that such children were “natural born Citizens.†The Naturalization Act of 1790 provided that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States . . . .†The actions and understandings of the First Congress are particularly persuasive because so many of the Framers of the Constitution were also members of the First Congress…
While the field of candidates for the next presidential election is still taking shape, at least one potential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz, was born in a Canadian hospital to a U.S. citizen mother. Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a “natural born Citizen†within the meaning of the Constitution. Indeed, because his father had also been resident in the United States, Senator Cruz would have been a “natural born Citizen†even under the Naturalization Act of 1790.
“
True only to the British Citizen.
Not the US...
We can carry this on until infinity but your argument will always fall flat as it has no substance or standing.
So apologies are not going to occur, and to take it a football field further, (since I am watching the games today) This attack by trump has not only infuriated me, it may well have cost him if he happens to win the nomination.
I assume that is also a insult to you so carry on!