[DiogenesLamp]

Okay. So you recognize Bayard as an authority.

Not really. He wasn't a delegate, he wasn't a member of a ratifying legislature. I merely point out that his commentary does not help your argument at all, and it has never made sense to me why you think this little blurb is worthy of notice. If anything, it hurts your argument because Bayard is asserting that jus soli is immaterial to natural born citizen status.

So can we take it that you now acknowledge that the claim that it takes BOTH birth on US soil AND birth to citizen parents to be a natural born citizen is complete nonsense?

After all this time arguing with me, you still don't grasp my position? After all the times i've posted this excerpt, you are still clueless as to where I stand on this point?

Un-fricken-believable.

Once again, I direct you to my tagline. "Partus Sequitur Patrem."

[Jeff Winston]

Okay. So you recognize Bayard as an authority.

Not really. He wasn't a delegate, he wasn't a member of a ratifying legislature.

Okay. So, according to you, the ONLY authorities on the question are those men who were either a) delegates to the Constitutional Convention, or b) members of ratifying legislatures. Correct?

After all this time arguing with me, you still don't grasp my position? After all the times i've posted this excerpt, you are still clueless as to where I stand on this point?

Okay. Let's clarify your position. What do you claim is required in order for a person to be a natural born citizen?