Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Re. your comment: “A woman’s rights are not violated if her son is not ‘natural born’. If you think that argument is gimmicky and unfair, I agree. But we must not expect the other side to be fair.”

I do not consider such an argument to be either gimmicky or unfair. This goes to the heart of the meaning of the phrase ‘natural born citizen’. My own view is that there never has been unanimity on the full meaning of this term. Some thought it included only Class A and no others. Some thought it included both Class A and Class B, but not C. Others thought it included Class A and Class C, but not Class B.

Where:
Class A represents children born in the territory of the US; both or one citizen parent
Class B represents children born in the territory of the US; neither parent a citizen
Class C represents children born outside the territory of the US; both or one citizen parent

I could add more classes and/or subclasses - it doesn’t stop here.

I think for the understanding of all and in the interest of clarity this phrase could be altered by Amendment to read “Citizen by birth”.


145 posted on 01/22/2016 5:27:17 PM PST by John Valentine (Deep in the Heart of Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies ]


To: John Valentine

Where are the ‘class A, B, and C’ codified?

[I tried to find it in Google, but it was hard to narrow the search.]


147 posted on 01/23/2016 4:17:05 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (Cruz and Trump FRiends strongest when we don't insult each other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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