"Founder and Historian David Ramsay Defines a Natural Born Citizen in 1789"
Looks good. The After-Birthers will have their panties in a wad. ;-) Bump for later read.
Again proving the Constitution, its meaning, its wording , and its definitions were clearly a result of being referenced to Vattels Laws of Nations. So what does the Laws of Nations say about a Natural Born Citizen?
Vattel in Bk 1 Sec 212, states the following.
§ 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.
Read more off my Blog
Very interesting. Bump to read later. Thanks!
PNSN:”Mommy and Daddy must BOTH be born in the USA in order for Baby to be considered a natural born citizen of the USA.”
ODH:In your opinion, your crazy, crazy opinion, as no court has ever held such a statement to be true, nor is there a definition of “natural born citizen” found in the US Constitution.
ODH:As for your explicit definition, there’s not a law school in the country, nor a state bar exam that adopts your definition.
If my opion is so crazy as you claim, read some more crazy stuff.
In his 1789 article, Ramsay first explained who the original citizens were and then defined the natural born citizens as the children born in the country to citizen parents.
Good work. :-)
Nothing new here.
This is what American History textbooks stated until history was removed form the curriculum.
This is a significant find. Mario Appuzo has found a Founder of this nation, a Continental Congressman, and a American historian of the Revolutionary War who expanded on what constitutes a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ from an essay he wrote in 1789. Pinged you so that you would know. :-)
for later reading
Make it stick!
When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdoms dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.s children.
|As we've demonstrated here on FR many times, if you apply EITHER Vattel's Law of Nations (Natural Law) or Blackstone's Commentaries (Common Law) to define Obama's Eligibility in the eyes of the Framers, Obama loses either way.
Vattel's Law of Nations (TWO Citizen Parents required)
Blackstone's Commentaries ("service to two masters" a/k/a Dual Citizenship)
Very important! Thank you for this historic context.
Citizen of the world, illegal alien, usurper........POS. Frog march this marxist muslim scumbag out of the people’s house.