Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: SampleMan
You are presuming that a baby must be born a citizen of some country, that is not the case.

Suits me. If it is not born of a country, then it isn't born of the American country.

Most countries would claim a child born to their citizens as a citizen, regardless of place of birth.

Not quite. I am claiming that a child of indeterminate birth is not a "natural born citizen", and cannot become one after the fact of birth.

33 posted on 08/31/2011 12:03:01 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp (1790 Congress: No children of a foreign father may be a citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp
I am claiming that a child of indeterminate birth is not a "natural born citizen", and cannot become one after the fact of birth.

That depends on the definition of "indeterminate" and "natural born". If it means recognized as a citizen from birth without a naturalization process, then that applies regardless of place of birth or timing of recognition, e.g. American parents on the moon.

If there is a legal clarification of the term "natural born" to be restrictive to geographical birth, then the term is more restrictive.

No doubt your underlying premise is the use of "natural born" in the Constitution. Interestingly, none of the Founders were born within a United States of America, but their birth rite was grandfathered in.

What exactly is your point of contention; the Obama birth right? If he was foreign born with a foreign parent and declared foreign citizenship before U.S. citizenship, he has some clear challenges concerning meeting the qualification of "natural born".

43 posted on 08/31/2011 2:26:47 PM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson