Replies

Odd...Natural Born citizen isn’t mentioned in any legal text, referenced in some very old texts, but not defined, even there as law. It is even capitalized for you to understand where to find that Natural Born citizen.

Yet you think it isn’t a Natural Law definition.

Whose theory? Natural Law doesn’t have multiple theories. It has obviousness.

There is only one form of citizenship that is OBVIOUSLY a Natural Born citizen. You claim to recognize the purpose of the requirement, but then immediately violate that recognition by, with your own viewpoint, allowing citizens with multiple obligations and loyalties, and even those without any obligation or loyalty to the US, at their births.

So...what are you *actually* thinking?

Please note, I support Cruz. I support him on the basis that the Constitution has *already* been overthrown, but he might be willing to restore it.

I thought the obvious reason was to prevent those without any ties or loyalty from birth from seeking to become citizens in order ultimately undermine the nation.

This was from the link to the Natural Law Wikipedia page that you posted the link to:

The use of natural law, in its various incarnations, has varied widely through its history. There are a number of different theories of natural law, differing from each other with respect to the role that morality plays in determining the authority of legal norms. This article deals with its usages separately rather than attempt to unify them into a single theory.

The fact that NBC has the word Natural in it doesn't necessarily link it to Natural Law.

There is only one form of citizenship that is OBVIOUSLY a Natural Born citizen.

It is not obvious, however, that it is the only form of citizenship that is Natural Born. In fact, the idea that it the only form is a fairly obscure minority view. The more obvious view is that NBC and citizen at birth are synonymous.

Please note, I support Cruz. I support him on the basis that the Constitution has *already* been overthrown, but he might be willing to restore it.

I agree that there is the possibility that the Constitution has already been overthrown because of the lack of curiosity about the location of Obama's birth, but if that was a real birth certificate and he was really born in Hawaii (very doubtful and somewhat doubtful), then he's eligible. There was certainly no urgency to take care that it was not violated.