Originally posted by N3k9Ni
reply to post by tkwasny
Give me your hand and I'll guide you through this.
The OP's argument is:
"“Natural Born Citizen” was defined as children born of two U.S. citizens – regardless of the location of the birth."
Because:
"The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens."
According to the information I posted:
"Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of
the United States at birth:""
And:
"Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year."
Therefore:
The argument that one is only a "Natural Born Citizen" if both parents are citizens is an invalid argument.
I'm sure your local colleges offer remedial reading comprehension classes. You might look into that.
edit on 18-11-2011 by N3k9Ni because: edited for clarity
You just can't be any more wrong than this. Take off your blinders for a minute and pay attention.
The Constitution was constructed from the foundation document called Law Of Nations by Vattel. Try some history classes.
Message body
www.constitution.org...
Book 1 Chapter XIX
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in
its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and
perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all
their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course,
that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore
that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of
discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is
necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not
his country.
