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.
The anti-birthers readily acknowledge that not all birthers are motivated by race - there are some crazy ones out there who are driven by their hatred. But many truly are concerned about the constitutional issue.
i've agreed with you that not all birthers are motivated by race, but i disagree that there are any birthers left whose only concern is the constitutional interpretation of "natural born citizen".
the constitutional argument is based on the belief that "2 US citizen parents" are required for NBC status. no where in US civic or legal history is this requirement mentioned and is contradicted by legal authority and has been directly rejected in court . i've yet to see a birther that, when losing this argument, hasn't switched to the "kenyan/non-US born" conspiracy theory.
If all the money in the country were equally divided and everyone started out from a "level playing field" the money would still end up in the hands of those who have it now. The poor would spend it on things they have always wanted but couldn't afford and the money will flow into the hands of the producers and job creators.
please point out my specific posts that are "distortions of the truth".
Constantly citing the wrong citations for natural born citizenship, pretense that a dual citizen can be a nbc, that Vattel had nothing to do with the founders intent for the Constitution etc etc etc and I might add, that you are here for ships n grins. You are here to distort and deflect the truth, so the populace remains stupid and ignorant. You are starting to lose that battle, many are beginning to wake up from the slumber and realize the Constitution is being rendered meaningless. Something you anti-birthers celebrate.
If you break up this posting, I will no be responding. Quote it all, or quote none of it.
The problem for birthers is that the STATE of HAWAII verifies that the information on the birth certificate is correct. Think about it. What is a birth certificate? It's a document that says that a person was born at a certain place at a certain time. But anyone could make up such a document. A birth certificate CERTIFIES that the state will confirm this information if the certificate holder is challenged. Birthers have challenged Obama. And the State of Hawaii has confirmed the information. As long as the State of Hawaii does so, the birthers have no grounds to challenge Obama about the document. The document became irrelevant when the State of Hawaii held a news conference to affirm that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.
Constantly citing the wrong citations for natural born citizenship,....
which exactly do you feel are "wrong"? ankeny v daniels? william rawle?
Quote:
..... pretense that a dual citizen can be a nbc, ...
yes they can be. our laws are not dictated on the whims of who other countries do or do not consider a citizen. this is confirmed by the decision in ankeny v daniels and the views of the US constitution by william rawle ( among multiple others ).
Quote:
....that Vattel had nothing to do with the founders intent for the Constitution ....
i've never stated that.
what i have stated is that it is impossible for the founding fathers to have based their definition of NBC on vattel's writing since he never used the term. the term was inaccurately translated into the english edition for the first time 10 years after the ratification of the constitution and long after vattel's death. the english editions at the time of the forming of the US constitution do not include NBC nor is it a direct translation from the original french.
i've also stated that many of vattel's beliefs published in his books are directly contradictory to the US constitution.
Quote:
etc etc etc
etc etc etc
Quote:
and I might add, that you are here for ships n grins.
yes, and i haven't been disappointed.
Quote:
You are here to distort and deflect the truth, so the populace remains stupid and ignorant.
nope. see above.
Quote:
You are starting to lose that battle, many are beginning to wake up from the slumber....
well then have them come over. i'd be happy to have them in our discussion.
Quote:
.... and realize the Constitution is being rendered meaningless. Something you anti-birthers celebrate.
the constitution still retains it's meaning ( at least on this topic ) and i wouldn't say "celebrate" but....... i'm a little gitty that i have the opportunity to defend the US constitution from conspiracy theorist's interpretations.
Quote:
If you break up this posting, I will no be responding. Quote it all, or quote none of it.
which exactly do you feel are "wrong"? ankeny v daniels? william rawle?
yes they can be. our laws are not dictated on the whims of who other countries do or do not consider a citizen. this is confirmed by the decision in ankeny v daniels and the views of the US constitution by william rawle ( among multiple others ).
i've never stated that.
what i have stated is that it is impossible for the founding fathers to have based their definition of NBC on vattel's writing since he never used the term. the term was inaccurately translated into the english edition for the first time 10 years after the ratification of the constitution and long after vattel's death. the english editions at the time of the forming of the US constitution do not include NBC nor is it a direct translation from the original french.
i've also stated that many of vattel's beliefs published in his books are directly contradictory to the US constitution.
etc etc etc
yes, and i haven't been disappointed.
nope. see above.
well then have them come over. i'd be happy to have them in our discussion.
the constitution still retains it's meaning ( at least on this topic ) and i wouldn't say "celebrate" but....... i'm a little gitty that i have the opportunity to defend the US constitution from conspiracy theorist's interpretations.
all there claud.
Two cases that directly address natural born citizenship are Minor v Happersett and Perkins v Elg
Quote:
Minor: The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.
Perkins v Elg Rationale of the logic is as follows: The U. S. Supreme Court in 1939 held that Elg was a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN because she was born in Brooklyn, New York on October 2, 1907, her father was naturalized as a U.S. citizen in 1906 under the Naturalization Act of 1906, and her mother derived her US citizenship in 1907 under the Expatriation Act of 1907. The Expatriation Act of 1907 extended the logic linking a woman's citizenship to her marital status and the status of her spouse.
Ms. Elg was found to be a "natural born citizen" because she was born in the mainland USA (New York) of TWO US citizen parents.
Steve and others have gone round and round with you on case law setting precedent. I am not going to pursue this argument further, because then we get into 'no he didn't, yes he did' nonsense. If you can read, it's plain as day. If you can listen, this explains why natural born citizen is a special designation for the Presidency.
The Obama "Birth Certificate" released by the White House has been proven a forgery on several levels, using computer software. But a simple test that even a child could do, show it to be a forgery without using any high tech software. The only thing required is your eye, and a pair of scissors.
Okay, lets say there is no birth certificate and its all falsified, then there would be records of immigration green cards and a record of naturalization, otherwise Obama would be an illegal immigrant.
And even if he were born in another country to a non US resident and US citizen, he is still a citizen of the US by birth right.
Two cases that directly address natural born citizenship are Minor v Happersett and Perkins v Elg
Ms. Elg was found to be a "natural born citizen" because she was born in the mainland USA (New York) of TWO US citizen parents.
Steve and others have gone round and round with you on case law setting precedent. I am not going to pursue this argument further, because then we get into 'no he didn't, yes he did' nonsense. If you can read, it's plain as day. If you can listen, this explains why natural born citizen is a special designation for the Presidency.
The judges in neither the Elg case or the Minor case address whether Elg or Minor would be considered "natural born citizens" if all their parents hadn't been US citizens. Why? Because both were born to US citizens. So the justices didn't have to rule on whether born in the USA alone conferred natural-born citizenship. Judges actually stick to the facts of the case. Which is why Wong is more persuasive regarding natural born citizenship and a child whose parents were not US citizens.
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.
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.
the money would still end up in the hands of those who have it now. The poor would spend it on things they have always wanted but couldn't afford and the money will flow into the hands of the producers and job creators.
