Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 01-13-2011, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,051,059 times
Reputation: 3954

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Why continue to ask irrelevant questions?
Because the right answer is devastating to your argument, of course.

Why else would I be asking?

And why else would you be running away?

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-13-2011, 01:09 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,800 posts, read 44,610,756 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Because the right answer is devastating to your argument, of course.
Maybe only to you in your wild goose chase faulty logic kind of way.

The bottom line in regards to your questions is that we know one does not need to have a passport to be a citizen, and we know the definition of "foreigner" as used by Jay in his letter to Washington originating the Constitution's 'natural born citizen' clause.

Both support my position on Obama's Constitutional ineligibility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2011, 01:16 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,051,059 times
Reputation: 3954
Another recap (and an explanation why IC refuses to answer the passport question).

Citizenship granted jus sanguins is automatic… it is citizenship by birth. This is explicitly asserted by the nationality laws of the UK, US and Italy alike. If multiple countries grant jus sanguinis citizenship to the same individual, that individual is (at least) a dual citizen whether they like it or not, whether they know it or not.

Most such citizenships never actually go beyond the purely theoretical level in that the individual rarely accesses the benefits of that citizenship for more than one country… generally the country of his residence at birth. This does not mean those citizenships are not real. It merely means that there has been no effort to access the benefits thereof.

If a citizen wishes to access the benefits of citizenship, then that individual must demonstrate their eligibility for that specific benefit through an affirmative act. In the case of the benefit of a passport, for example, the person must notify the government that they exist and provide evidence that they are in fact a citizen. Note… the act of applying for a passport is not an application for citizenship. It is application for a benefit of that citizenship. And it requires the government to formally recognize that citizenship status.

This is true for all citizens applying for the benefit… not just foreign born citizens. American citizens born and raised here are still citizens even if they never get a passport. The government’s formal recognition of the person’s citizenship by granting that document is not the moment at which citizenship is acquired. The citizenship already existed. And yet it still required an affirmative act of the individual (in this case the passport application) before that citizenship could be recognized.

Every nation that offers jus sanguinis citizenship has the same or very similar requirement for an affirmative act to have that citizenship recognized.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2011, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,051,059 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Maybe only to you in your wild goose chase faulty logic kind of way.
So answer the questions and prove it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
The bottom line in regards to your questions is that we know one does not need to have a passport to be a citizen, and we know the definition of "foreigner" as used by Jay in his letter to Washington originating the Constitution's 'natural born citizen' clause.

Both support my position on Obama's Constitutional ineligibility.
Who can tell? You are too afraid to answer the questions at all, so we will never know if what you say here is true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2011, 01:38 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,800 posts, read 44,610,756 times
Reputation: 13625
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Another recap (and an explanation why IC refuses to answer the passport question).
You've already admitted that having or not having a passport is irrelevant to one's citizenship status.

Quote:
Citizenship granted jus sanguins is automatic… it is citizenship by birth. This is explicitly asserted by the nationality laws of the UK, US and Italy alike. If multiple countries grant jus sanguinis citizenship to the same individual, that individual is (at least) a dual citizen whether they like it or not, whether they know it or not.

Most such citizenships never actually go beyond the purely theoretical level in that the individual rarely accesses the benefits of that citizenship for more than one country… generally the country of his residence at birth. This does not mean those citizenships are not real. It merely means that there has been no effort to access the benefits thereof.
Exactly, except for Italy (they require an application and extensive documentation of those born outside Italy).

Obama's foreign citizenship (UK) at birth is real. That is why he is not a 'natural born citizen' in the Constitutional sense.

Quote:
If a citizen wishes to access the benefits of citizenship, then that individual must demonstrate their eligibility for that specific benefit through an affirmative act. In the case of the benefit of a passport, for example, the person must notify the government that they exist and provide evidence that they are in fact a citizen. Note… the act of applying for a passport is not an application for citizenship. It is application for a benefit of that citizenship. And it requires the government to formally recognize that citizenship status.

This is true for all citizens applying for the benefit… not just foreign born citizens. American citizens born and raised here are still citizens even if they never get a passport. The government’s formal recognition of the person’s citizenship by granting that document is not the moment at which citizenship is acquired. The citizenship already existed. And yet it still required an affirmative act of the individual (in this case the passport application) before that citizenship could be recognized.

Every nation that offers jus sanguinis citizenship has the same or very similar requirement for an affirmative act to have that citizenship recognized.
No. Witness Italy's extensive citizenship application reqirements, and the UK's statement that children who become British citizens automatically do not need to register. Also note the use of 'shall be' in the British Nationality Act of 1948.

Shall is an imperative command used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory.

Your logic is faulty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-13-2011, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,051,059 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
You've already admitted that having or not having a passport is irrelevant to one's citizenship status.
Then it is a very good thing that such an assertion is a red herring and has nothing to do with the argument I make.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Exactly. Obama's foreign citizenship (UK) at birth is real. That is why he is not a 'natural born citizen' in the Constitutional sense.
Almost, but not quite.

Obama's foreign citizenship at birth is real. Just as the jus sanguinis citizenship of tens of millions of other American dual citizens are real. Just as my Italian citizsnhip at birth is real.

And yet... most of those tens of millions of American dual citizen are also natural born American citizens, even by the most strict Birther definition; i.e. born in the United States to two citizen parents.

QED: Natural born US citizens can be dual citizens at the same time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
No. Witness Italy's extensive citizenship application reqirements, and the UK's statement that children who become British citizens automatically do not need to register. Also note the use of 'shall be' in the British Nationality Act of 1948.
There is no such thing as an Italian "application for citizenship." There is instead an application for recognition of citizenship that already exists. And as demonstrated in the previously offered links, the Italian application is far simpler than the UK equivalent.

Obama does not qualify for the registration exemption because it did not exist until 1983, he was never a British Citizen, and he is an adult.

Note the identical "shall be" in the Italian law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Shall is an imperative command used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory.
In Italian too.


Last edited by HistorianDude; 01-13-2011 at 02:02 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2011, 04:56 PM
 
26,554 posts, read 14,400,421 times
Reputation: 7412
there is yet another birther lawsuit poised to hit the SCOTUS, Purpura v. Sebelius, containing aspects of obama's eligibilty. if you truly want to put your money where your mouth is IC i'd suggest you turn over ( or sell ) all the non-refutable evidence you have to the prosecution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2011, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,051,059 times
Reputation: 3954
Hollister v. Soetoro was in conference at SCOTUS today.

Its denial without comment will published in the Orders on Monday.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2011, 07:57 PM
 
26,554 posts, read 14,400,421 times
Reputation: 7412
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
... evidence you have to the prosecution.
i should have said plaintiff(s). honestly not trying to over dramatize things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2011, 08:04 PM
 
19,226 posts, read 15,293,746 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
QED: [/b][/i][/color]Natural born US citizens can be dual citizens at the same time.
Not AFTER the signing of the Constitution, only BEFORE the signing.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:55 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top