Of course it says that all that's needed is for a person to be a citizen by birth. It says that ABSOLUTELY DIRECTLY.
Once again you illustrate that you're prepared to simply call black white, and white black, and completely deny reality, in order try pitifully to maintain your false belief:
It is only requisite that he should be a citizen by birth.
I don't know how anyone could say more directly IT IS ONLY NECESSARY THAT A PERSON BE A CITIZEN BY BIRTH, except to substitute the more modern word NECESSARY for the out-of-date synonym "requisite."
As for whether it took citizen parents to be a natural born citizen, IT DIDN'T. As another of America's FOREMOST LEGAL EXPERTS, WILLIAM RAWLE WHO WAS A MEMBER OF THE FOUNDERS' INNER CIRCLE MEETINGS LEADING UP TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, wrote:
"Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."
Again, you couldn't be more clear. The foremost authorities in the early United States, including not only James Bayard and William Rawle, but also George Washington and nearly half of the Signers of the Constitution, say that birthers are completely full of sh*t.
Except that the only citizens by birth were "all the children of citizens." It is a QUALIFIED statement. The context defines citizens by birth as the children of citizens. And your Rawle quote is equally misleading because it is describing the circumstances at time of the passage of the Constitution. Aliens who swore their allegiance to the United States became automatic citizens, thus their children born in the country were citizens. Neither of these quotes say what you desperately but incorrectly want them to say.