So why'd he post the laws granting citizenship to children born abroad ?
And where in those posted laws does it say anything about 'natural born' citizenship ?

Someone posted about needing two parents for "natural born citizenship".
The law mentioned shows only one is needed (for one born outside the US). If only one is needed for one born outside the US, I think we can dispense with needing two for someone born in the US.

That phrase has not been defined in US law.

Razark answers it nicely.

'natural born' has a specific meaning with regards to the constitution.

Please state that meaning, and the source.

At this time (I'm at work) I can only add to my previous examples:
The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787
by James Madison

http://www.constitution.org/dfc/dfc_0904.htm



Vattel: The law of Nations, book 1
http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm

http://www.constitution.org/ussc/98-0097c.htm
Also, read the last paragraph in a dissent by Justice Thomas.

I'll pull out my Franklin and congressional congress quotes when I get home, but as SCOTUS hasn't directly addressed the 'natural born citizenship' requirement it's difficult to quote any caselaw. I'm feeling a bit like a baited rabbit who peeks out from behind a rock, while a dozen guns take aim.

This is crap.

It is in no way illigitimate to expect Obama to answer questions about his background and citizenship, especially in regards to a Constitutional requirement. He could have done this in 15 minutes, 2 years ago, but chose to dance around the issue instead. Furthermore, few seem to grasp the reason so many question his citizenship, is the way he talks and behaves. He says he is a Christian, but seems to know less about Christian hollidays and customs than about Muslim hollidays and customs. The only churches he ever attends are those like the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, where anti-American diatribes are frequent. He travels to muslim countries and bows before their leaders. He shows little loyalty to, or concern for the United States. He is very secretive about his background and past associations. His thinking seems to be entirely the product of radical leftist, anti-american education. He has nearly spent the nation into oblivion. So yes, some people are starting to question his fitness for office. U.S. citizens have a right to expect that their President is honest, trustworthy and can faithfully execute the duties of office. This is hardly racism.

Do you think Obama is above question? Is he special?
Do you think that opponents are being mean and unfair?
When Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter in the 1980 election, the Democrats were very unhappy. Very, very unhappy. Democrats never loose an election, it seems. They decided that they must have lost because of Reagan and Bush conspiring with Iran to hold American hostages until after the election, so Carter would lose. The centerpiece of the conspiricy was that G. Bush had to fly to Paris in an SR-71 and back so nobody would know he left. This "theory", was considered credible by Democrats. I don't mean democrat wing-nuts and nobodies sitting at home by their computers. I mean Democrats in Congress. They actually conducted a formal investigation.


I also seem to remember, just days ago, where some of the lefties were making fun of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is a religious fanatic. Sarah Palin handles snakes. Sarah Palin is an idiot. Etc. Etc.
This line of criticism degenerated into pornographic areas. The moderators felt it necessary to cut the posts.

One can trash Sarah Palin all day long, but don't anyone DARE question King Obama.

SUBMAN1/SteamWake/Bubblehead, is that you? Your rambling paint-by-numbers political diatribe sure sounds like it.

Quotes and so forth are fine, but our nation is not run on quotes. It is run on laws.

Until someone addresses the question with legislation or court decisions, the term will remain undefined. Until then, it's simply a lot of different people's opinions.

hopefully we don't have another one to deal with!!

This is the first I have heard of the birth certificate debacle. :hmmm:






:O:

One thing is for sure, the media is really trying to take Trump apart. Every title I see about him tries desperately to slant him as a fringe candidate. Hey, maybe he has a real chance! :O: Now you may say, he is a fringe candidate. Yeah, but so was Obama, and he got elected.

He's just as much white as he is black, my friend. It's old style racist to call someone black just because part of their ancestry is black.

Trump has a snowballs chance in the desert. He will only prove to be a distraction.

I said nothing of the kind. You said to be a natural born citizen takes two parents who are citizens. I showed you the law that proves you wrong. Now you're trying to change the subject.

And by that Constitutional standard Obama fits the bill. It should be obvious that in that context 'Natural Born' meant born in this country.

The Vattel reference is interesting, but Vattel was writing an opinion based on common law. Unless you think something written by a Frenchman which is not even law in France should be binding in the United States. It is important to our thinking and certainly a basis for legal opinion, but it is not the law we live by.

The very fact that you use the acronym favored by one side of the political spectrum shows your bias. And nobody's targetting you. You chose to take a stance different than some others, and they choose to disagree. The fact that you on one occasion use a dismissive tone to seemingly show superiority doesn't help. No one likes to be talked down to.