Politics Birther 2.0?

Don't ask me, I can't see anything he says.

 

Mine is, I never see anything worthwhile he says.

 

I wouldn't know. Maybe he dramatically changed the last time I interacted with him.

Edit: Yeah, I know, fat chance, but miracles do occur.

 

Heh? Do you think the word "natural" is superfluous? Redundent? Why would that be when it is only used to futher qualify the office of the President, and only the President?

 

Are you sure she wasn't born through a C-Section?

 

In Kamala's case the only relevant point is she is mentally, morally and ideologically unfit to fill the position.

Game over.

 

Logic. I'm speaking to the his belief that Obama wasn't eligible and he must think that because he's black bullshit.

 

Naturalization Act of 1790

provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of nationalcitizenship....

It also provided for citizenship for the children of U.S. citizens born abroad, stating that such children "shall be considered as natural born citizens," the only US statute ever to use the term. It specified that the right of citizenship did "not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.

 

What do you mean?

 

how do you figure. You already voted in a more deranged mentally, morally bankrupt and ideologically unfit person. I would venture my life savings that Kamala Harris has a higher IQ than trump.

The game will be over in 2 years or less and we can get back to having a country that isn't in turmoil for 2 years running.

 

Where did you find this definition?

 

So you are saying the word is redundant?

Do you have a source of the definition?

 

I want some of that action. Joe, my plumber, has a higher IQ than Trump.

 

Very good! Except this is an opionion not a source definition of the term used in the Constitution. Since it is not defined in the Constitution, then there must be a source definition contained some where contemporary with the creation of the Constitution. Cornell is a little late for that role.
Besides that is in in direct conflict with the partial definition contained in the 1790 law, the only other place in US law where the term is use.

This; " The Act also establishes the United States citizenship of certain children of citizens, born abroad, without the need for naturalization: "the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens:provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States"








Naturalization Act of 1790
Print Cite

The first statute in the United States to codify naturalization law. Alternately known as the Nationality Act, the Naturalization Act of 1790 restricted citizenship to "any alien, being a free white person" who had been in the U.S. for two years. In effect, it left out indentured servants, slaves, and most women. This implied that black and, later, Asian immigrants were not eligible to be naturalized, but it said nothing about the citizenship status of non-white persons born on American soil. Subsequent nineteenth-century legislation included a racial requirement for citizenship. It was one of several early immigration laws that shaped the framework and outcome of theOzawa v. United States case in 1922.[1]

Upon declaring independence from Great Britain, the leaders of the new republic aspired to create a distinct American nationality and minimize the risk of another monarchy. When they drafted the 1787 Constitution, they did not define what they meant by "natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States" and said very little about immigration. As historian Rudolph Vecoli notes, "one became an American by choice, not by descent," through a common commitment to the doctrine of
>>>
natural rights. Consequently, the only distinction between "natural born" and naturalized citizens it made was that the latter were to be ineligible for the presidency. It did authorize Congress to "establish a uniform Rule of naturalization" and allowed for the "migration or importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit," resulting in a steady flow of slaves until 1808.[2]

The Naturalization Act of 1790 set the criteria for naturalization to two years of residency, proof of good moral character, and an oath to support the Constitution. It also mandated that one must "absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign Prince, Potentate, State or Sovereignty." Despite its generous terms extending citizenship to all children of citizens, it denied the right to naturalize to "persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States." The law's use of the phrase, "free white person," also excluded blacks and immigrants of other races from being eligible for citizenship.[3] In 1795, as anti-immigrant feeling began to grow, the necessary period of residence was increased to five years. Without the right to naturalize, immigrants would not be able to vote and would have no political voice or power.

In 1870, Congress created a second racial category. In keeping with the reforms of the Reconstruction era, the new legislation gave "aliens of African nativity and persons of African descent" access to citizenship. Racial barriers to naturalization remained for Asians, but loopholes in citizenship rules and procedures allowed for successful petitions for naturalization through local courts. The Naturalization Act of 1906 standardized the application process with direct bearing on theOzawacase. This legislation now regulated nonracial requirements such as filing a declaration of intention and appearing before a judge, but the preceding racial limitations were left intact.[4]


At the point >>> you sse the reference to Natural RightS! As in Natural Law. Ah and if you go there, you will find the precise definition of Natural Born. And is does suuport the concept of children born
beyond the boards be also Natural Born and that the Citizenship follws with the Father. Father not a resident citizen, the the children are not Natural born Citizens."


I can copy the definition here if you wish. I do believe it will be the only source definition contemporary with the time of the Constitution you will find.

 

Perhaps!
But how about you?