And the point you miss is that because of these dichotomies, none of the people heretofore being mentioned are "natural citizens." They are all naturalized. The 14th amendment is a "naturalization" Amendment.
Even in it's wording it equates being born here with being naturalized.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
It plainly regards birth in the US the same as naturalization because it makes no distinction between the two. What was it Chief Justice Waite Said again?
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens.
As the 14th amendment plainly says who will be "citizens", we must conclude that it does not say who shall be "natural born citizens", or ... that Justice Waite is an imbecile.
No, the 14th is not about naturalization. Naturalization is what happens when a non-citizen becomes a citizen under the laws of Congress. Congress passes laws concerning naturalization, per the Constitution.
If you don’t go thru a naturalization ceremony, then you are born a citizen - in 17th & 18th century terminology, a “natural born citizen” or natural born subject.
As the WKA decision clearly says, the 14th Amendment wording merely restates the the NBC clause in other words - “...to exclude, by the fewest and fittest words...the two classes of cases...both of which, as has already been shown, by the law of England and by our own law from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in America, had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the country.”