“I’m not sure if you realize it or not”
I could say something similar about you.
Yes or no? Why won’t you hazard an answer?
Countries can bestow citizenship on whomever they wish by domestic law. By now you must realize that even a Constitutionally sound NBC can end up being a dual citizen without intending it to happen.
Now, natural law, Law of Nations, international law, that’s a different story. One country will typically tend to have a dominant claim on the hide of a particular individual, say, for example, for purpose of obligatory military service. So there’s citizenship, and then there’s CITIZENSHIP. Luxembourg’s claim on the hide of the child in question is, naturally, pitifully weak. The U.S.’s claim, by contrast, is, also naturally, irresistibly strong by virtue of the impossible-to-defeat NBC definition. In a hypothetical international judicial forum, the U.S. would prevail, hands down.
Natural Born Citizen means, for example, that Luxembourg can’t get very far with a campaign to impress the individual in question and other similarly situated individuals off a U.S.-flagged merchant ships to supply crews for their seamen-starved man-of-war battleships, to pull an obscure example out of history. The U.S. if it chooses to do so would be well within its rights to haul Luxembourg before a Law of Nations international judicial tribunal and go about keelhauling its tiny, landlocked ass as a remedy against such wrongdoing.
I’ve heard this “dual citizenship” angle bandied about for years. It’s okay for what its worth, but it’s one or two levels too shallow to shed adequate light on the more complex NBC issue. Further elaboration is necessary which is what I’ve been trying to do with you. Without willing cooperation on your part, sadly. Sort of like what happened with Mark Levin on his book tour in 2013. Not that you’ve done anything wrong at all, but Mark Levin came out of that exchange with egg on his face after multiple on-air attempts to justify his weak position. He ended up looking for sll the world like an indiscriminate Cruz supporter with inadequate respect for the U.S. Constitution (willing to twist its language or ignore its obvious import to benefit a non-NBC friend).
That countries law cannot change where a person was born or the parents to whom they were born. Nothing can change that and your argument dies right there. So a country bestowing citizenship on an American Citizen is meaningless in the United States. It does not change where they were born and it does not change their parents. They could bestow deity status and it means nothing.
You are being just like the liberals. Things aren't the way you want them to be so you want to change the meaning of the language to suit your desire. You want citizenship by birth to mean something other than where you were born and to whom you were born. You want it to include whatever some other country decides. Obviously the founders would not have agreed.