Seriously, I think what’s behind this article is not an commitment to law but hatred of evangelical Christians.
And that is what we have to start looking at.
I truly think being “naturalized at BIRTH” is splitting legal hairs.
The whole point of “natural born” is someone growing up with an allegiance to a certain country, an identification with it. How much further back can you go but “birth”?
My father was a German, and became an American citizen in his twenties, and from seeing him, I can see why the requirement is there for “natural born.” Naturalized citizens have split allegiances, and hold onto the ideas somewhat of their country of birth and childhood, which is also the country of their family.
I don't buy that, because I don't buy the notion that Ted Cruz is the paladin of evangelical Christians, and thus, to say a word against him is to be persecuting Christians. I think that's a false argument.
It's about the Constitution. Cruzers constantly go on and on and on about how we need Ted Cruz because "he's the only one who cares about the Constitution," and then they turn around and want to sweep his potential ineligibility under the rug because he's their guy.
That's the same thing that Obama's cult followers did in 2008. I'm not interested in latching onto Ted Cruz in some kind of cult of personality.