Yes, the founders were concerned with DUAL and DIVIDED loyalties.
They want the President to be DEVOTED to the United States and NOT to any other country.
I think that was the SPIRIT of their concern.
Having said that, let’s get real...
Being born a natural-born citizen does not guarantee that you will love America when you grow up ( See for instance, The American Taliban, John Walker Lindh ).
Being born a foreigner on the other hand does tell us where a person’s heart will lie when he becomes a naturalized American. I know of several foreign born soldiers who have fought bravely for this country.
“I know of several foreign born soldiers who have fought bravely for this country.”
Please point me to which clause in article II says that “foreign born soldiers who have fought bravely for this country” are eligible to be president.
See, possibly, Barack Hussein Obama Jr. Does he qualify as a natural-born citizen? Even if he does, he definitely does NOT love America. He has repeatedly shown his true colors, and they are not red, white, and blue. If the idea was to prevent anyone from being president whose loyalty is other than to America, Barack Obama is living proof of the failure of that clause.
While that is most certainly true, such exceptions do not invalidate the rule.
The Constitution mandates that the nation select one person to be President each four years. Given that divided loyalties were a concern, especially after a bloody revolution, it makes sense that the Founders would want to eliminate that one concern. That some foreign born citizens might be eliminated, despite their loyalty, would have carried no weight whatsoever.
The Founders would not have viewed being elected President as a RIGHT. It is a privilege bestowed upon one person by the Electors. Constraining the Electors to a subset of the entire population would be viewed as prudent, not punitive.
Where is the outrage that a President must be at least 35 years old? This was a prudent measure to eliminate at least some of those whose experience and maturity would be inadequate for the job. Were our Founders at all concerned that some deserving 30 year old would be barred from the office? Of course not.
It might be a shame to eliminate McCain or Cruz, but it simply doesn't matter if eliminating them will insure that we don't elect someone who has a non-citizen parent and was raised to maturity in a foreign land.
And if they are required to attack and destroy their original country, would they be able to do it? Would you want to trust their ability to do such a thing?
(Think Russian Immigrant having to fire Nuclear missiles at Russia.)
Better to avoid such a thing altogether.