It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


O' bama is not NATURAL born. It is clear. Only a fortnight now....

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 09:48 AM
Disclaimer: I'm a theist but not of the Abrahamic faiths. I have minor biblical scholar and scriptural skills. Also I am not a scientific/legal or medical expert in any field. Beware of my Contagious Memes! & watch out that you don't get cut on my Occams razor.All of this is my personal conjecture and should not be considered the absolute or most definitive state of things as they really are. Use this information at your own risk! I accept no liability if your ideology comes crashing down around you with accompanying consequences!

Explanation: From

nat·u·ral (nchr-l, nchrl)
1. Present in or produced by nature: a natural pearl.
2. Of, relating to, or concerning nature: a natural environment.
3. Conforming to the usual or ordinary course of nature: a natural death.
a. Not acquired; inherent: Love of power is natural to some people.
b. Having a particular character by nature: a natural leader.
c. Biology Not produced or changed artificially; not conditioned: natural immunity; a natural reflex.
5. Characterized by spontaneity and freedom from artificiality, affectation, or inhibitions. See Synonyms at naive.
6. Not altered, treated, or disguised: natural coloring; natural produce.
7. Faithfully representing nature or life.
8. Expected and accepted: "In Willie's mind marriage remained the natural and logical sequence to love" (Duff Cooper).
9. Established by moral certainty or conviction: natural rights.
10. Being in a state regarded as primitive, uncivilized, or unregenerate.
a. Related by blood: the natural parents of the child.
b. Born of unwed parents: a natural child.
12. Mathematics Of or relating to positive integers, sometimes including zero.
13. Music
a. Not sharped or flatted.
b. Having no sharps or flats.
a. One having all the qualifications necessary for success: You are a natural for this job.
b. One suited by nature for a certain purpose or function: She is a natural at mathematics.
2. Music
a. The sign () placed before a note to cancel a preceding sharp or flat.
b. A note so affected.
3. A yellowish gray to pale orange yellow.
4. Games A combination in certain card and dice games that wins immediately.
5. An Afro hairstyle.


[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin ntrlis, from ntra, nature; see nature.]


natu·ral·ness n.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

NOTE: Bold was my emphasis for SARCASM ONLY!

Oh and some more next post...

[edit on 3-8-2009 by OmegaLogos]

posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 09:49 AM
Disclaimer: As above and is still totally APT!

Continued from above post....

Natural Born Citizen [sourced from

Section 1 of Article II of the Constitution contains the clause: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Additionally, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution states that: "[N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

There is currently debate concerning the definition of "natural born citizen." The main focus of this debate is whether or not children born to Americans overseas be considered eligible for the Presidency. Several main candidates have sought the office who were born outside the United States (e.g., George Romney was born in Mexico to U.S. parents, Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory, and John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents). Barry Goldwater's case among these three is unique in that although he was born outside the United States, Arizona was later admitted as a state. None of these candidates was elected, so the issue was never fully addressed. However, McCain is currently seeking the 2008 Republican nomination for President.

The origin of the natural-born citizen clause can be traced to a July 25, 1787, letter from John Jay to George Washington, presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention. John Jay wrote: "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen." There was no debate, and this qualification for the office of the Presidency was introduced by the drafting Committee of Eleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Constitutional Convention.

The requirements for citizenship and the very definition thereof have changed since the Constitution was ratified in 1788. Congress first extended citizenship to children born to U.S. parents overseas on March 26, 1790, under the first naturalization law: "And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond sea, or outside the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."[1] This was addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case as a form of naturalization.[2] The Dred Scott case, however, was overturned by the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868. The Fourteenth Amendment mentions two types of citizenship: citizenship by birth and citizenship by law (naturalized citizens): "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."

All persons born in the United States, except those not subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. government (such as children of foreign diplomats) are citizens by birth. There is some debate over whether other persons with citizenship can also be considered citizens by birth, or whether they should all be considered citizens by law (thus "naturalized"). Current US statutes define certain individuals born overseas as citizens by birth.[3] One side of the argument interprets the Constitution as meaning that a person either is born in the United States or is a naturalized citizen. Thus, to be a "natural born citizen," a person must be born in the United States; otherwise, they are citizens by law and are naturalized.[4] To others, the statute that grants citizenship to American children born overseas exempts them from the term "naturalized" and thus, as with the 1790 law, they are to be considered "natural born citizens" eligible for the Presidency.[5] Examples of persons who become citizens at birth (whether "naturalized" or "natural born") would include: birth to Americans overseas, or birth on U.S. soil, territories, or military bases overseas.[6]

There is current speculation about whether the two major American political parties will seek to remove the natural-born citizen requirement for the Presidency in the near future, as they both have popular, effective, and/or charismatic governors in the Austrian-born Arnold Schwarzenegger of California on the Republican side, and the Canadian-born Jennifer Granholm of Michigan--often tapped as a potential United States Attorney General in future Democratic administration--on the Democratic side; both won their respective elections in large, diverse states with more than 55% of the vote. Case LawAlthough the U.S. Supreme Court has never specifically addressed the meaning of "natural born citizen," there are several Supreme Court decisions that help define citizenship:
Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857): In regard to the "natural born citizen" clause, the dissent states that it is acquired by place of birth (jus soli), not through blood or lineage (jus sanguinis): "The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, 'a natural-born citizen.' It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth." (The majority opinion in this case was mostly overturned by the 14th Amendment.)
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898): A person born within the jurisdiction of the U.S. to non-citizens who "are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity" is automatically a citizen.
Weedin v. Chin Bow, 274 U.S. 657 (1927): A child born outside the U.S. cannot claim U.S. citizenship by birth through a U.S. citizen parent who had never lived in the U.S. prior to the child's birth. (This is still true today, although the specific statutes upon which the Supreme Court's ruling was based have changed since 1927.)

Continued below...

[edit on 3-8-2009 by OmegaLogos]

posted on Aug, 3 2009 @ 09:49 AM
Disclaimer: As above and is still totally APT!

Continued from above post....

Perez v. Brownell, 356 U.S. 44 (1958): Although the 14th Amendment sets forth the two principal modes of acquiring citizenship (birth in the U.S. and naturalization), nothing restricts the power of Congress to withdraw citizenship. (This case was overturned by Afroyim v. Rusk.)
Montana v. Kennedy, 366 U.S. 308 (1961): A person born in 1906, whose mother was a native-born citizen of the United States and whose father was a foreign citizen, who was born overseas and then moved to the United States, was not a citizen of the United States by birth. (Note that the relevant laws have changed considerably since 1906, so this decision does not necessarily apply to later cases.)
Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967): The 14th Amendment's provision that "All persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States" completely controls the status of citizenship and prevents the involuntary cancellation of citizenship.
Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815 (1971): A person who is born abroad to an American mother shall lose his or her citizenship unless he or she resides in this country for at least five years between the ages of 14 and 28. (This is no longer the case; the statute under which Mr. Bellei lost his citizenship was repealed by Congress in 1978.)
Vance v. Terrazas, 444 U.S. 252 (1980): Congress has the power to define acts of expatriation (i.e., loss of citizenship). However, intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship must be established specifically by a preponderance of evidence; such an intent may not be inferred automatically as a result of a person's having performed an act which Congress has designated as an expatriating act. However, when "one of the statutory expatriating acts is proved, it is constitutional to presume it to have been a voluntary act until and unless proved otherwise by the actor."
Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420 (1998): A child born overseas to an American father and a foreign mother (not married) is not a U.S. citizen unless paternity is established before an established age (in this case 21). This case challenged the law on the grounds that U.S. law requires no explicit acknowledgment of parenthood in the case of a foreign-born child to an American mother and a foreign father (not married).
Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53 (2001): As in the Miller v. Albright case, the Court holds that a child born overseas to an American father and a foreign mother (not married) is not a U.S. citizen unless paternity is established before an established age (in this case 18). The child was brought to the U.S. before his sixth birthday and raised by his father; however, after a criminal conviction, deportation was ordered but the child claimed U.S. citizenship. His citizenship was denied because paternity had not been established prior to his 18th birthday. The Court upheld the law, once again affirming that Congress has the power to define citizenship outside the citizenship dictated by the 14th Amendment (citizenship by birth).
The Supreme Court, through case law, has created a guideline for U.S. citizenship. The following outlines the rulings of the Court:
The 14th Amendment completely controls the status of U.S. citizenship and prevents the involuntary cancellation of citizenship.
All persons born in the United States are citizens of the United States.
This applies to children born to legal and illegal residents.
This does not apply to children of foreign citizens employed in any diplomatic or official capacity.
Congress has the power to define acts of expatriation (i.e., loss of citizenship).
A person must voluntarily relinquish U.S. citizenship.
It is constitutional to presume it to have been a voluntary act until and unless proved otherwise by the actor.
Congress may revoke citizenship involuntarily if it has been obtained unlawfully.
Congress has the power to define citizenship outside birth in the U.S.
Congress can set different citizenship requirements for children born to American mothers versus American fathers.
Congress can require that U.S. citizenship must be established by a certain age for it to be recognized.
Notes1. ^ Statutes at Large, 1st Congress, 2nd Session. A Century of Lawmaking for a New Nation: U.S. Congressional Documents and Debates, 1774 - 1875. Library of Congress (1790). Retrieved on 2006-11-10.
2. ^ Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856). Supreme Court Cases. Westlaw (1856). Retrieved on 2006-11-10.
3. ^ Citizenship and Nationality. U.S. Department of State. U.S. Department of State. Retrieved on 2006-11-09.
4. ^ U.S. Congress moves to clarify the rules: Just how 'American' must a president be?. International Herald Tribune. International Herald Tribune (June 2, 2004). Retrieved on 2006-11-09.
5. ^ Citizen McCain's Panama Problem?. Washington Post. Ken Rudin (July 9, 1998). Retrieved on 2006-11-09.
6. ^ Citizenship. New Book of Knowledge. Scholastic Library Publishing, Inc. (2006). Retrieved on 2006-11-09.

This article is copied from an article on Wikipedia® - the free encyclopedia created and edited by online user community. The text was not checked or edited by anyone on our staff. Although the vast majority of the Wikipedia® encyclopedia articles provide accurate and timely information please do not assume the accuracy of any particular article. This article is distributed under the terms of GNU Free Documentation License.

Personal Disclosure: As an Australian your constitutional woes are a moot [mute?] point for me but as an ATS member I try to disambiguate when and where I can. I'm hoping someone can do the same for me and point me to evidence of Obama spending [puts little finger to corner of lips DR EVIL STYLE!!!] 1 MILLION $$$'s on hiding his true origins.

[edit on 3-8-2009 by OmegaLogos]

posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 09:54 AM
You "Birthers" are so funny, not even Bill O Reilly will side with you on this lol.

I personally believe Obama is a United States Citizen. I also believe, it doesn't matter. He's not the one calling the shots, not really anyway. And anybody who believes he is anything more than a puppet is sadly mistaken, waste your time and energy on something that actually matters, rather than post wall of text after wall of text about why Bush was an amazing President and why Obama sucks.

Your obviously not seeing the strings here.


new topics

top topics
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in