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

To: Nero Germanicus
The law is based on the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment which is a corollary to Article II, Section 1. They fit together nicely: anyone who is a Citizen of the United States At Birth under the 14th Amendment is also a natural born citizen under Article II, Section 1.

Nope. Not even a constitutional amendment can redefine the concept of a "natural citizen" as informed by the natural law philosophy the founders relied upon to create the nation. It makes as much sense as redefining "pi."

No, "Natural citizen" is a concept independent of modification. It is in effect, a "natural law" constant, no different from the speed of light or the charge on an electron.

Only liberal sophists think they get away with tampering with natural law. They only end up making a mess of it. Again, I point out "gay" marriage.

What we have nowadays is a cohort of judges and lawyers who are too ignorant to understand that they don't understand something, and too stupid to realize that they should.

Our judicial system has become the perfect storm of kookery, but with all the trappings of "authority."

75 posted on 04/12/2016 6:25:33 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp

There is no “redefinition.” The term natural born citizen was left undefined.
“The Constitution does not say in words who shall be natural born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to determine that.” SCOTUS- Minor v Happersett, 1874


80 posted on 04/12/2016 6:32:50 PM PDT by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | 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