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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:34 PM
 
1,523 posts, read 1,437,771 times
Reputation: 356

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
He's legally eligible to be our President. Get over it. Seriously.

P.S. I'm not going to watch a 14 minute video on something I already know is bogus, especially since I'm at work right now... but I've noticed a disturbing trend these days, where people actually refer to YouTube videos as "sources." I don't know what that particular video claims, but you do realize ANYONE can record & post a video on there, don't you? I hope so!
Take a listen when you get home. It's very educational about Natural Law and Positive Law and how citizenship was granted by fathers only at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.

True Meaning of Article II "natural born Citizen", A Scientific Legal Theory pt1of2 - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:36 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,073,168 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier View Post
It's very educational about Natural Law and Positive Law and how citizenship was granted by fathers only at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.
The man has no idea what the hell he is talking about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:37 PM
 
1,523 posts, read 1,437,771 times
Reputation: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
"Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are "natural born Citizens" for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."

ankeny v daniels
After listening to this educational video, the court got it wrong.


True Meaning of Article II "natural born Citizen", A Scientific Legal Theory pt1of2 - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,073,168 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier View Post
After listening to this educational video, the court got it wrong.
All 200 of them?



You guys believe the most idiotic stuff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:44 PM
 
1,523 posts, read 1,437,771 times
Reputation: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
The man has no idea what the hell he is talking about.
Based on what? He seems to be well versed in the founders original intent, allegiance and the reasons why the founders created Article 2 Section 1. It had to do with citizen fathers when it came to the presidency. During the founders time, you were recognized to have political rights and allegiance based on having a citizen father and that gave you the natural right to qualify for the presidency. He makes the distinctions of our law compared to the monarchy at the time of the adoption of the constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:44 PM
 
26,562 posts, read 14,437,840 times
Reputation: 7431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier View Post
...... how citizenship was granted by fathers only at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.

"Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural-born citizen within the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."

-william rawle. constitutional scholar, lawyer, george washington appointee and guy that was around at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:46 PM
 
26,562 posts, read 14,437,840 times
Reputation: 7431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier View Post
After listening to this educational video, the court got it wrong.
you may also want to try throwing a temper tantrum. works for some kids.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:46 PM
 
Location: USA
2,112 posts, read 2,595,813 times
Reputation: 1636
You birthers and Illumanti dolts are always good for a laugh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:49 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,892 posts, read 16,073,168 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier View Post
Based on what?
Based upon everything he has been writing for the last 4 years. He has never gotten within the same county as the Founder's and Framer's original intent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier
He seems to be well versed in the founders original intent, allegiance and the reasons why the founders created Article 2 Section 1.
You only believe that because your own ignorance on the subject is so intense that you are easily lead to accept anything that conforms to your prejudice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier
It had to do with citizen fathers when it came to the presidency.
Nope. It had to do with 300 years of Anglo-American common law under which the citizenship of the parents was irrelevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Army Soldier
During the founders time, you were recognized to have natural rights based on having a citizen father and that gave you the natural right to qualify for the presidency. He makes the distinctions of our law compared to the monarchy at the time of the adoption of the constitution.
And that distinction is a figment of his imagination.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:51 PM
 
1,523 posts, read 1,437,771 times
Reputation: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrecking ball View Post
you may also want to try throwing a temper tantrum. works for some kids.
Let's get something straight. I wore the uniform and served in the Army for 20 years and was in serious fierce combat. You have no idea what the hell you are talking about when it comes to my character. I do not throw temper tantrums.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 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