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.
ah, logicwings is once again backing off of the "born in kenya" thing and is back on the "children born to a non-citizen and a citizen aren't natural born" thing.
One universal point most all early publicists agreed on was natural-born citizen must mean one who is a citizen by no act of law.
If a person owes their citizenship to some act of law (naturalization for example), they cannot be considered a natural-born citizen.
This leads us to defining natural-born citizen under the laws of nature - laws the founders recognized and embraced.
Under the laws of nature, every child born requires no act of law to establish the fact the child inherits through nature his/her father’s citizenship as well as his name (or even his property) through birth.
This law of nature is also recognized by law of nations. Sen. Howard said the citizenship clause under the Fourteenth Amendment was by virtue of “natural law and national law.”
The advantages of Natural Law is competing allegiances between nations are avoided, or at least with those nations whose custom is to not make citizens of other countries citizens without their consent. Any alternations or conflicts due to a child’s natural citizenship are strictly a creature of local municipal law.
In the year 1866, the United States for the first time adopted a local municipal law under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes that read: “All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.”
Rep. John A. Bingham commenting on Section 1992 said it means “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
Uh, no, it's the US Code, Title 8, Sec. 1401 that defines this. Your argument, such as it is, is preposterous. Regarding "Indians not taxed" being excluded, are you aware we had a VP (who has to meet the same criteria as the pres) who was a Native American? Let's posthumously unelect him!
[SIZE=+1]Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.[/SIZE]
In the year 1866, the United States for the first time adopted a local municipal law under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes that read: “All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.”
Rep. John A. Bingham commenting on Section 1992 said it means “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
Bingham subscribed to the same view as most everyone in Congress at the time that in order to be born a citizen of the United States one must be born within the allegiance of the Nation.
Bingham had explained that to be born within the allegiance of the United States the parents, or more precisely, the father, must not owe allegiance to some other foreign sovereignty.
Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, James F. Wilson of Iowa, added on March 1, 1866: “We must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United States is a natural born citizen of such States, except that it may be that children born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign Governments.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1117 (1866))
The phrase “temporary sojourners” referred to those in the country for purposes of work, visiting or business and who had no intention of taking the steps to become citizens, or incapable by law.
These are the men that played a part of the 14th Amendment.
ah, logicwings is once again backing off of the "born in kenya" thing and is back on the "children born to a non-citizen and a citizen aren't natural born" thing.
“passionate attachment of one nation for another, produces a variety of evils,” and goes on to say:
Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification.
It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation, of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions;
by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill- will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld.
And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity;
gilding, with the appearance of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation."
What better way to insure attachment to the country then to require the President to have inherited his American citizenship through his American father and not through a foreign father.
“passionate attachment of one nation for another, produces a variety of evils,” and goes on to say:
Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification.
It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation, of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions;
by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill- will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld.
And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity;
gilding, with the appearance of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation."
What better way to insure attachment to the country then to require the President to have inherited his American citizenship through his American father and not through a foreign father.
You do realize that we've had presidents with foreign born fathers right? So literally everything you have said so far is irrelevant and ignorant? Get over it, Obama is president, he was legally elected. Deal with it.
soooooooooo, how about that 1898 court case that determined that people born in the u.s. to permanent residents are citizens no matter what their parents' citizenship?
united states vs. wong kim ark
Held: In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that under the Fourteenth Amendment, a child born in the United States of parents of foreign descent who, at the time of the child's birth are subjects of a foreign power but who have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and are carrying on business in the United States, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under a foreign power, and are not members of foreign forces in hostile occupation of United States territory, becomes a citizen of the United States at the time of birth.
and why would someone who barely knew their foreign father have less of an attachment to the country than someone who barely knew their american father?
that's ridiculous.
personally, despite the fact that it's totally irrelevant to obama, i wouldn't object to that clause being amended to include a specific amount of time someone has been a citizen, rather than this vague clause about being "natural born". this isn't the 18th century, there's not a worry that the king of france will become president or something.
Yeah, but the people who were processed into Soylent Green were actually born in America. If they hadn't rioted, they would have been elegible to be electred POTUS.
March 1, 1866: “We must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United States is a natural born citizen of such States, except that it may be that children born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign Governments.”
Logic(?)Wings, by your own quote, above, in 1866 every person born in the US is a natural born citizen of such States, with a few exclusions that do not apply to Obama.
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.
