For someone who places complete faith in the virtue of Legal technicalities and the concept of legal "precedent uber alles", I will point out to you that according to the law, the father of the marriage *IS* the legal father.
From a legal perspective the Biological father is irrelevant.
Even so, we don't even know for sure who is Barry's biological father. It would have been nice if someone had grabbed some DNA a long time ago.
Fascinating.
I always thought that “natural born” referred to biological parents.
I learn some thing new every day.
Barack Obama Senior did acknowledge paternity of a son named Barack Hussein Obama, II BORN IN Honolulu on August 4, 1961. he acknowledged paternity to William Wood of the Immigration and Naturalization Service on August 31, 1961. He also acknowledged his marriage to Stanley Ann Dunham Obama.
I support the concept of “stare decisis” with the provison that rulings in landmark decisions can establish new precedents and reverse old precedents.
For example, The Dred Scott decision that persons of African origin had never been and could never be Citizens of the United States was “stare decisis” for nine years until the Civil Rights Act of 1866 rendered it moot, as did adoption of the 14th Amendment in 1868.
Without DNA confirmation, we don’t know for certain who anyone’s fathers are.
There is a Constitutional provision under the Full Faith and Credit clause to accept official vital records as authentic and accurate while allowing for legal challenges to the accuracy of any vital record. Obama’s vital records have been challenged scores of times, but thus far not successfully.