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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-20-2013, 08:05 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
22,894 posts, read 16,275,630 times
Reputation: 12807

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
And it doesn't say an American parent. It is plural.
So a child born to a widow in this circumstance is not a citizen?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-20-2013, 08:24 AM
 
2,836 posts, read 3,094,428 times
Reputation: 1399
In the United States, the right of national citizenship is defined by federal law; which legislative authority, under the Constitution, resides in Congress. In the 1950's, the Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. §1401, et seq. defining nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. These provisions, some of which apply retroactively, govern a person’s status as a natural born citizen; which federal statutes supercede prior case law (including decisions of the Supreme Court) on the subject of citizenship to the extent inconsistent with the Congressional legislation. Under this law, both Barack Obama and John McCain were eligible to be President of the United States. NB: Prior to the enactment of § 1403(a) of title 8 of the United State Code in 1952, Senator McCain would not have been deemed a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President. See Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (2008).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 08:28 AM
 
1,523 posts, read 1,121,184 times
Reputation: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
In the United States, the right of national citizenship is defined by federal law; which legislative authority, under the Constitution, resides in Congress. In the 1950's, the Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. §1401, et seq. defining nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. These provisions, some of which apply retroactively, govern a person’s status as a natural born citizen; which federal statutes supercede prior case law (including decisions of the Supreme Court) on the subject of citizenship to the extent inconsistent with the Congressional legislation. Under this law, both Barack Obama and John McCain were eligible to be President of the United States. NB: Prior to the enactment of § 1403(a) of title 8 of the United State Code in 1952, Senator McCain would not have been deemed a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President. See Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (2008).
Wendell. That still doesn't answer the question in the OP. Here it is:

When the 14th Amendment was created, the natural born Citizen clause, Article 2 Section 1 was never amended to it. It was left separate. What was the specific reason?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 08:50 AM
 
2,836 posts, read 3,094,428 times
Reputation: 1399
Old Soldier: The rights of citizenship - as are all rights - are defined by law. That's the meaning of the Constitution - we are a nation of laws and not men. For example, the Second Amendment does not provide any rights; and whatever rights that are secured by the Second Amendment, they are nevertheless subject to law. This fundamental principle - the primacy of the rule of law - is the one thing that most Americans don't understand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 08:56 AM
 
1,523 posts, read 1,121,184 times
Reputation: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
Old Soldier: The rights of citizenship - as are all rights - are defined by law. That's the meaning of the Constitution - we are a nation of laws and not men. For example, the Second Amendment does not provide any rights; and whatever rights that are secured by the Second Amendment, they are nevertheless subject to law. This fundamental principle - the primacy of the rule of law - is the one thing that most Americans don't understand.
That's not what I asked you. For the 2nd time, please answer the question:

When the 14th Amendment was created, the natural born Citizen clause, Article 2 Section 1, was never amended to it. It was left separate. WHAT WAS THE SPECIFIC REASON?

Last edited by Old Army Soldier; 01-20-2013 at 09:04 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 09:00 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,518 posts, read 33,800,345 times
Reputation: 14246
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24 View Post
So a child born to a widow in this circumstance is not a citizen?

The child still has a father.... Unless he is the next chosen one to be God's child, from a virgin.
Think it out before you post, please!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 09:02 AM
 
2,836 posts, read 3,094,428 times
Reputation: 1399
The Fourteenth Amendment has nothing to do with it. Consider women's rights for example: when did women get the right to vote? What was the source of their rights?
And as for voting for the President, under the Constitution, you have no such right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
23,298 posts, read 11,541,269 times
Reputation: 4315
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
And it doesn't say an American parent. It is plural.
It is plural in the sense you can have more than one parent, but it does not say if it has to be both, that doesnt matter since President Obama was born in HAWAII
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 09:03 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,518 posts, read 33,800,345 times
Reputation: 14246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
Old Soldier: The rights of citizenship - as are all rights - are defined by law. That's the meaning of the Constitution - we are a nation of laws and not men. For example, the Second Amendment does not provide any rights; and whatever rights that are secured by the Second Amendment, they are nevertheless subject to law. This fundamental principle - the primacy of the rule of law - is the one thing that most Americans don't understand.

"Shall not be infringed", is powerful language that has no interpretation. It says what it means very plainly and without confusion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 09:07 AM
 
2,836 posts, read 3,094,428 times
Reputation: 1399
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
"Shall not be infringed", is powerful language that has no interpretation. It says what it means very plainly and without confusion.
"Shall not be infringed" does not preclude "regulation". You left out the word "right" which is provided by law.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 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