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

To: walkingdead

Respectfully, in the scenario you mention, does it matter if he did it in the U.S.?

I know it is crazy to think of George III touring the states, but it was almost as likely as him taking a run at an American ex-pat at the time, and actually claiming the child.

My point is that plenty of communist, and even islamic terrorist sympathizers are born here every day. Our sovereignty is not particularly in jeopardy if an American citizen procreates here or elsewhere. The NBC stipulation is vague. One must decide intent by precedent and writings of the day, not what-ifs.

Just my opinion, and as I said, it is submitted respectfully.


74 posted on 04/12/2016 4:52:05 PM PDT by madconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: madconservative

“Just my opinion, and as I said, it is submitted respectfully”

I appreciate that. I also agree the scenario is beyond absurd but situations pushed to the extreme often help when pondering intent.

I believe the natural born clause is a protection, left to us by the founders to midigate the possibility of anyone foriegn usurping the highest office in the nation.

With that in mind I propose the question of ole George’s son getting a crack at the office, and what I believe the founders would do.

If the natural born clause is truly to mitigate divided loyalties then there is no way (in my opinion) that the original intent would allow King George son, or in this case Cruz.


92 posted on 04/12/2016 5:07:43 PM PDT by walkingdead (It's easy, you just don't lead 'em as much....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | 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