U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-15-2010, 08:30 PM
 
66,239 posts, read 30,145,317 times
Reputation: 8606

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
You know, I just don't understand these birthers' perspective. Do they think they are the only ones who know that Obama was called a British citizen by the Brits? Do they not think that the DNC didn't know that going into this election, especially considering it's in Obama's book and widely known? Do they not think someone would have pursued this somewhere other than City-Data before Obama received the nomination? Come on guys!
Just look at this thread, and all the others there have been on this topic. In every single one of them, many people had no idea there is a difference between 'citizen' and 'natural born citizen.' Many people had no idea that an immigrant must swear an oath renouncing and abjuring any allegiance ever held to any foreign sovereignty to become a naturalized citizen.

Think about it... it's common sense. Why would we ask more of an immigrant to become a naturalized citizen than we would expect of someone wanting to be our national leader and the Commander in Chief of our military forces?

We wouldn't.

How is it even conceivable that a naturalized citizen, who actually swears an oath renouncing and abjuring any and all previously held foreign allegiances is not eligible to be POTUS and CIC, but someone born a foreign subject who has never renounced their foreign allegiance is eligible?

It's not.

THAT is why being a natural born citizen, as defined by the SCOTUS decisions I've cited, and John Jay's letter to Washington, and Vattel's Law of Nations ...matters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-15-2010, 08:39 PM
 
19,216 posts, read 12,939,918 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
You know, I just don't understand these birthers' perspective. Do they think they are the only ones who know that Obama was called a British citizen by the Brits? Do they not think that the DNC didn't know that going into this election, especially considering it's in Obama's book and widely known? Do they not think someone would have pursued this somewhere other than City-Data before Obama received the nomination? Come on guys!
Rules don't rule.

Politics rule.

I don't like it, but hey, that's just the way things are.

Rule of law? Don't make me laugh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 08:45 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,880 posts, read 102,269,915 times
Reputation: 32945
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Just look at this thread, and all the others there have been on this topic. In every single one of them, many people had no idea there is a difference between 'citizen' and 'natural born citizen.' Many people had no idea that an immigrant must swear an oath renouncing and abjuring any allegiance ever held to any foreign sovereignty to become a naturalized citizen.

Think about it... it's common sense. Why would we ask more of an immigrant to become a naturalized citizen than we would expect of someone wanting to be our national leader and the Commander in Chief of our military forces?

We wouldn't.

How is it even conceivable that a naturalized citizen, who actually swears an oath renouncing and abjuring any and all previously held foreign allegiances is not eligible to be POTUS and CIC, but someone born a foreign subject who has never renounced their foreign allegiance is eligible?

It's not.

THAT is why being a natural born citizen, as defined by the SCOTUS decisions I've cited, and John Jay's letter to Washington, and Vattel's Law of Nations ...matters.
Vattel's screed matters not one whit. He wasn't even an American, let alone a Supreme Court justice. John Jay's letter matters little; it was a letter not a legally binding document. The case you cited last night said a person with two American born parents is a citizen; it did not address a person born in the US with one parent who is a citizen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 08:55 PM
 
66,239 posts, read 30,145,317 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Vattel's screed matters not one whit. He wasn't even an American, let alone a Supreme Court justice. John Jay's letter matters little; it was a letter not a legally binding document.
Jay's letter established the origin and meaning of 'natural born' citizen as to why that particular terminology was included in Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

Quote:
The case you cited last night said a person with two American born parents is a citizen; it did not address a person born in the US with one parent who is a citizen.
Incorrect. Read it again.

Last edited by CaseyB; 12-16-2010 at 05:38 AM.. Reason: off topic/personal
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 09:32 PM
 
Location: Tallahassee
1,869 posts, read 884,329 times
Reputation: 299
Did anybody notice that the guy was found guilty and they are now deliberating what the sentence should be?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2010, 09:44 PM
LML
 
Location: Wisconsin
7,109 posts, read 8,098,071 times
Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Vattel's screed matters not one whit. He wasn't even an American, let alone a Supreme Court justice. John Jay's letter matters little; it was a letter not a legally binding document. The case you cited last night said a person with two American born parents is a citizen; it did not address a person born in the US with one parent who is a citizen.
There you go again. Trying to confuse them with facts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 03:28 AM
 
32,070 posts, read 16,493,051 times
Reputation: 17191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perlier View Post
Did anybody notice that the guy was found guilty and they are now deliberating what the sentence should be?
Pretty much a foregone conclusion.

"Is that your commanding officer?"
"Did he sign your orders?"
"Did you follow them?"

Done, guilty. I actually hope they're lenient - excise him from the service, there's no need to destroy him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 03:40 AM
 
32,070 posts, read 16,493,051 times
Reputation: 17191
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Just look at this thread, and all the others there have been on this topic. In every single one of them, many people had no idea there is a difference between 'citizen' and 'natural born citizen.'
Everybody, except the Birfers, knows that "citizen" covers those who are citizens by birth or naturalization, and "natural born citizen" covers those who are citizens by birth. Vattel wasn't dug out of history's attic until the "Fake Birth Certificate" storyline got just a little too embarrassing.
Quote:
Manypeople had no idea that an immigrant must swear an oath renouncing and abjuring any allegiance ever held to any foreign sovereignty to become a naturalized citizen.That oath is not legally binding in the slightest. Hundreds of thousands retain dual citizenship, voluntarily or involuntarily.
It is chuckle-worthy that you're giving every nation in the world the right to disqualify a Presidential candidate, though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 07:30 AM
 
Location: East Lansing, MI
8,723 posts, read 7,925,436 times
Reputation: 3698
The bottom line would appear, to me, to be that if the SCOTUS never rules that President Obama is NOT a natural born US citizen, then the point is moot. No?

Until then, he's the President and carries all the authorities and burdens of that office. You don't get to say "I'm not going to play becuase I *think* that guy shouldn't be in charge.". That's just not how our military works.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-16-2010, 07:57 AM
 
32,070 posts, read 16,493,051 times
Reputation: 17191
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan View Post
The bottom line would appear, to me, to be that if the SCOTUS never rules that President Obama is NOT a natural born US citizen, then the point is moot. No?

Until then, he's the President and carries all the authorities and burdens of that office. You don't get to say "I'm not going to play becuase I *think* that guy shouldn't be in charge.". That's just not how our military works.
Actually, he'd still be in charge until impeachment proceedings completed. At which point in time President Joe Biden would be sworn in, as per the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:46 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top