[NJ_Tom]

IMO, it is illogical to ignore statements by members of the Convention that, as Madison stated "the Common Law of England is not the Common Law of the United States" (emphasis added). In addition, the fact that the court in Minor vs. Happersett specifically referenced common law, when defining NBC differently from the definition that you derive from Natural Born Subject in English Common Law, is a clear acknowledgement that the "common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers ... were familiar" was understood to differ from that of England. You must remember that the status of "subject," natural born or not, included a religious requirement, which would have been anathema to the Framers. Finally, under English Common Law, once a natural born subject, one was forever a subject - one's allegiance to the British Crown was permanent and could never be surrendered. Hence, the impressing of US seamen that contributed to the War of 1812.

However, this all becomes moot when one considers the forged birth certificates, the forged Selective Service registration and the use of multiple Social Security numbers (including, at present, one that fails E-Verify.)

Any one of these is a felony; not having registered with Selective Service is a bar to serving in any Federal office, including US Senator. Regardless of the status of his parents, this alone bars Mr. Obama from the Presidency.

[New Jersey Realist]

It is so good to have an intelligent conversation without name calling.

The English common law was absolutely Christian, and their entire system of Government was based upon their unique view of natural law being issued directly from Jesus Christ as enforced by the English monarch.

And that in fact is where the phrase “natural born subject” originally came from — it came from a Christian view of natural law. And in that Christian view of natural law (see Romans 13:1) God himself had established a natural order for the world. In that order, kingdoms and authorities were ordained by God himself. Kings derived their power from God and from the natural order that he had set up.

And if you were born under an authority, you had a duty to obey that authority as far as good conscience would allow you to. If the King said taxes were due, as a good citizen, you were to pay your taxes. (“Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and to God that which is God’s.”)

In that view, all persons born within a kingdom were natural, born subjects of that Kingdom.

And THAT view of natural law — not the clumsy idea, devoid of any actual historical or theological substance, that “it takes two leopards to make a leopard,” is where the term “natural born subject” — and by extension, “natural born citizen” — historically derived from.