What does Natural Born really mean?

Everyone has been up in arms, ever since Obama released what is claimed to be his "long-form" Birth Certificate. There have been claims on both side of the debate about the definition of Natural Born. I decided to actually read documents that concerned the matter, and share results I found.

I have underlined obviously relevant portions.

I guess we should just look at the US Constitution first and see what it says...

US Constitution text

US Constitution
ARTICLE I, Section 8:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Okay, so we know that violating the Law of Nations is against the US Constitution.

Let's look at what the Law of Nations by Emerich de Vattel. In this case, portions relevant to Natural Born.

Text of Law of Nations

BOOK1, CHAPTER 19
Of Our Native Country and Several Things That Relate to It

§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.”

Due to the fact that the Founding Fathers declared the Law of Nations and it's definitions protected by law, it is obvious that the Founding Father meant for these definitions to apply to the very same terms borrowed from this document.

It would seem that Natural Born really does mean that you were born on a countries soil, and both of your parents are from that country.

I don’t know what’s worse, that you think this deserved yet another thread, or that you actually believe that the “Law of Nations” referenced in the define and punish clause of Article I Section 8 is talking about a book!

Sigh...

reply to post by aptness


Okay, if not that work, then what Law of Nations is it referring to?

Since you claim to know, you can go ahead and share it.

I am not political really, I think the record will show that.

So I am going to answer your question OP, just like this:

It means, where did your momma's birth-water splash onto the ground. Onto what ground did your fluid of survival (womb water) splash unto the soil, and what soil did it splash upon. That is nature: The fluid which houses you like a little manufactured item inside your momma, suddenly bursts just like a chicken's egg, that means the old way is over: You are moving forward.

I have no political comment to make, I haven't criticized the Executive much, I would only vote in 2012 to write in John Lear as a candidate anyway. I think he was born in the US, but if not, then no, I would support the COTUS and write in someone else. See that is the problem with the write in vote! You can't vet your candidate properly before the election! TRUTH!

Ah I still say lay off the Executive, it's a tough job. You simply cannot elect a leader and then pester him to make a better world. The very childish nature of that request recommends people who will always generally fail to meet the expectations.

The real issue is the makeup of the electoral college. The COTUS provides a way to amend. OP, what you should be asking is, What does "Naturalized" mean, as in the 14th Amendment. I mean we know what it means, but what should it mean, or what does that word mean? It is key to the understandings as to the nature of these events. Born or naturalized, and subject to the COTUS. Therefore one could say, that if we have a correct and good process of 'naturalization', then we can assure that we only admit people we

Also OP a further question would be: How would the relatively recent invention of the "corporate person" be affected by the 13th and 14th Amendments? That is to say, do I as a human, benefit by adhering to some corporate person and becoming a resource of that person? It would appear that if the Amendments do not apply to the corporate personage of peoples, but applies only to control the human resource, then I guess it makes sense to become a worker. So I guess working enough in America might qualify as 'naturalization', so long as the work was slave-like enough, according to the compromise of the 13th and 14th amendments.

Anyway, good thread! Let's hope it goes somewhere! In the end, nobody would give two schintts where the Executive was born, so long as he defended and loved America. It is up to you how you would place your own value judgment on what the phrase "defended and loved America" means to you, but I know what it means to me.

reply to post by smallpeeps


It is interesting you bring up the 14th amendment. That amendment was principally authored by John A. Bingham.

This is what he had to say on citizenship...

“every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”

(Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

Originally posted by Byteman
Okay, if not that work, then what Law of Nations is it referring to?

International law. The term “Law of Nations” used in the Constitution is a term of art, it’s preposterous to believe it’s a reference to a particular book.

reply to post by aptness

Define word of art, and show how Law of nations means International Law via that mechanism.

reply to post by Logical one


I wasn't on this board a few hours ago, so you are not telling the truth.

If I made the mistake of calling a continent a country, it is only semantic and inconsequential.

Originally posted by Byteman
inconsequential.

Yes, like Obama’s father citizenship or self-declared race.

Define word of art

You’re serious? Did you bother checking the dictionary?

Term of art—

A word or phrase that has special meaning in a particular context.

and show how Law of nations means International Law via that mechanism.

Law of nations—

another term for international law

If you want more elaborate explanations and descriptions of the origins of the term (hint: jus gentium), I respectfully suggest you do some research.

Something you should have done before starting this thread.

reply to post by aptness


Well, you would have just said this in your first post if you had actually known it.

Instead of spending my time proving that Law of Nations refers to Vattel, I'll just stand on the shoulders of another whose done the leg-work.

Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness How the Natural Law Concept of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Inspired America's Founding Fathers by Robert Trout

BTW, this was authored in 1997 so you can't accuse him of being a birther.

Originally posted by Byteman
reply to post by smallpeeps

 

It is interesting you bring up the 14th amendment. That amendment was principally authored by John A. Bingham.

This is what he had to say on citizenship...

“every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.”

(Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

"Within the jurisdiction"?

That is not sufficient, I call for a quorum or a plebescite.

Because, the 14th has two qualifications: Born/Naturalized and Subject to the Jurisdiction. Those are TWO qualifying factors.

Therefore it is logically impossible to say that any baby which breaks its birth fluid within some Jurisdiction, becomes Naturalized. That is just silly. No baby can take an oath.

The 14th makes a clear distinction and explains subjection to jurisdiction. Typically that's mom's sig on your birth documents which are then used to get state benefits, a job via SSN and other modern trust-benificiary relationships/ponzi-powerschemes. So when you get your SSN you go to mom and say, "Where's that form that made me legit?" and she produces it. I mean I am not saying the system works, I am just explaining the trust relationship.

When you get your SSN card, note that is a actually a sort of vehicle for currency. Yes, for it says clearly that it has value and must be returned if asked for, this impso facto implies value on the part of the issuer, hence they are "trusting you" with the power of citizenship via SSN, and you "trust them" to not screw you over. As a side note, hugs are generally the simplest way to induce trust, and they are by their nature, two way transactions, and can be considered, win-win in the most simple sense. Well you know, the gangsters and such have taken the fake-hug-then-kill meme to a whole sick level, but I think by establishing the primacy of the hug as the ultimate win-win transaction, we can then move on to better and bigger subjects like "trust" and "trust relationships".

Good thread, hope it survives.

Watch this.

Originally posted by Byteman
Well, you would have just said this in your first post if you had actually known it.

I see you apply your birther stance to everything. “Since Obama took so long to release his long form birth certificate, it can only mean it’s fake!!!”

You’re the one who is wasting my time. You don’t know one bit of what you’re talking about and when others point out the obvious flaw in your statements you get defensive and lack the humility to acknowledge you were wrong.

Enjoy your stay on ATS.

reply to post by smallpeeps


All I can say is that Bingham himself has given an easy to understand definition of Natural Born. Perhaps it is...shall we say...legal theory and modern legal definitions that take the 14th into a different context than intended.

Here is something about Alexander Hamilton, a Founding Father, and his being heavily influenced by Vattel.

Alexander Hamilton

It has been stated that Hamilton more than any other designed the US government. He is the one who called for the Constitution to be wrote. This man who was influenced by Vattel.

Originally posted by Byteman
It has been stated that Hamilton more than any other designed the US government. He is the one who called for the Constitution to be wrote. This man who was influenced by Vattel.

Awesome stuff there, they definately all earned their wigs and peerages and whatnots.

Myself I am from Boston, and we have an Indian on our flag. Now, not a lot of people care about it, but to me, it means a lot. So I tend to see that Jefferson took a lot from the tribes. Now of course, equal measure has been given, so I think Native and Colonist and Naturalized Persons can both make America great, but it is more of a religious discussion that is building, less of a political discussion. Politics like art, has been killed stone cold dead. But of course both politics and art can have meaning and still exist, just that they won't be funded unless they are suitable to the regime.

You don't know what to tell me?

Just answer what I asked you: Does the 13th and 14th Amendments apply to corporate persons as well as real persons? That question is the point of all political back and forth. Think about it.

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

Just look at what you're saying, OP:

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against [Vattel's book The Law of Nations];

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against [international law];

Seriously, which sentence makes sense?

Your interpretation is hilarious. If they really meant to refer to Vattel's book, wouldn't they have at least capitalized the title, as would be proper?

You guys ran out of straws a while ago, now you're just grasping at empty air.

reply to post by aptness

I see you apply your birther stance to everything. “Since Obama took so long to release his long form birth certificate, it can only mean it’s fake!!!”

Nonsense. You just want to call people Birther at any chance you can get.

You’re the one who is wasting my time. You don’t know one bit of what you’re talking about and when others point out the obvious flaw in your statements you get defensive and lack the humility to acknowledge you were wrong.

You chose to come into this topic and spend your time here, of your own free will. You are the one to blame if you cannot resist the temptation of "birther" topics.

I've done the research, I know what I am talking about, it is common knowledge among genuine Constitutional scholars that the Law of Nations refers to Vattel. Writings from virtually every Founding Father mention him and his work as influential or cogent to issues.

LMAO, I'd say I'm fairly debating my side of the issue. You say I'm being defensive, but you've taken it upon yourself to come into every birther topic and "attack" the posters.

The real question is why you are so offensive about the issue? Offensive in the sense of tactics, not offenses.

You say I lack the humility to admit I am wrong. Well, that is pure hypocrisy. Even without considering Vattel's Law of Nations, you've still been shown multiple sources in multiple threads that Natural Born means two American citizen parents. You have yet to admit you may be wrong.

It's funny how only birthers are defensive and lack humility when they won't admit they are wrong, but the same does not apply to you.

Enjoy your stay on ATS.

Look at the join date, buddy.

BTW, since these topics are wasting your time, then the logical solution is to not post in them. If you continue to do so, then you are contradicting your own words.