Ted Cruz Natural Born ?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Keyes......oh, Keyes......

In the dictionary Natural Born Citizen (note that the phrase contains three words, all of which convey a distinct concept, which the joining of them conveys the sum of those respective concepts) is defined as:

Natural: occurring as a matter of course and without debate; inevitable

That's not the dictionary definition, Keyes. The only place you can find that definition is here:

Natural: occurring as a matter of course and without debate; inevitable...

ROFLMNAO!

Can you IMAGINE the weeping and gnashing of tooth, if someone would have accused that contributor of this... prior to her having done so?

LOL! There is truly no means to underestimate these idiots.

 

[Vigilante]

I used it 4 times, as it accurately describes the mixed race Racist in the white house...!

How interesting that you seem so uncomfortable having the transparent intention of your block-headed repetition thrown in your face. Maybe you should grow up and choose your words more carefully next time.

Apparently I HURT your female side! Grow a pair young man, this is USMB and a FREE and OPEN EXPRESSION can be posted here! A long time ago you chastised me on my language UNTIL, I quoted one of your vulgar language replies to another poster! You have been silent towards me since then.... consider your options, as people do have a long memory, and files are kept just to remind one why a certain poster is a blowhard, and a hypocrite!

 

[Skylar]

In the dictionary Natural Born Citizen (note that the phrase contains three words, all of which convey a distinct concept, which the joining of them conveys the sum of those respective concepts) is defined as:

Natural: occurring as a matter of course and without debate; inevitable

That's not the dictionary definition. That's the definition from Worshiphing Upside Down: Polluting Worship Versus Loving God.

Natural: 5. occurring as a matter of course and without debate; inevitable

Worshiphing Upside Down: Polluting Worship Versus Loving God.
pg. 319

Worshiping Upsidedown and Backwards - Doris Speiginer Wheeler - Google Books

And when you actually look up 'natural born' in the dictionary, you get this:

"Natural Born:

.adjective
1. native-born.
2. by virtue of one's nature, qualities, or innate talent:
a natural-born musician.

.Natural born Define Natural born at Dictionary.com

And when you go to Native Born, the first definition provided by the dictionary, you get this:

Native Born:

adjective
1. born in the place or country indicated:
a native-born Australian.

Native-born Define Native-born at Dictionary.com

Exactly as I said, defined by place of birth. Not parentage.

You're ignoring the Supreme Court of the United States, English Common Law AND the Dictionary on the meaning of 'natural born'. And my favorite part? My absolute favorite part of your whole blunder?

This:

But how cool is it that for your thesis to stand, the DICTIONARY can NOT be used to define the words at issue!

Laughing.........you make this so easy, Keyes.

Keep running. Its not like any of it changes just because its inconvenient to your argument.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The Reader should take a look at these videos, wherein: Dr. Herb Titus explains "Natural Born Citizen"...

 

[Skylar]

How Precious! An abrupt abandonment of its claims!

The Reader should take a look at these videos, wherein: Dr. Herb Titus explains "Natural Born Citizen"...

And what evidence does Herb Titus present? For example, I've cited the USSC in Wong Kim Ark. And your youtube video cites.......

....who? I've watched the video. He presents no evidence, cites no cases. He simply says it must be so. Wong Kim Ark says otherwise.

And why the sudden backing away from dictionary definitions? Didn't Doris Wheeler work out for you?

 

[Vigilante]

How Precious! An abrupt abandonment of its claims!

The Reader should take a look at these videos, wherein: Dr. Herb Titus explains "Natural Born Citizen"...

And what evidence does Herb Titus present? For example, I've cited the USSC in Wong Kim Ark. And your youtube video cites.......

....who? I've watched the video. He presents no evidence, cites no cases. He simply says it must be so. Wong Kim Ark says otherwise.

And why the sudden backing away from dictionary definitions? Didn't Doris Wheeler work out for you?

Your evidence has about as much effect on Patriots as ours has on a bunch of Socialist/subversives! Shall we continue....WHAT IS YOUR HOME COUNTRY, Shithook?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Native-born Define Native-born at Dictionary.com

Natural Born... Not "Native Born" , which Dr. Titus explains in the following videos, is a 'Citizen by Birth'.

The phrase at issue is "Natural Born Citizen"... which, despite your subjective need that such be synonymous with Native Born, it is NOT!





There is NOTHING complex about this issue, yet there you are thoroughly confused by it.

ROFLMNAO!

Reader: Can you IMAGINE the weeping and gnashing of tooth, if someone would have accused that contributor of being incapable of using a dictionary... prior to her having done so, repeatedly ^ABOVE^?

LOL! There is truly no means to underestimate these idiots.

 

[Skylar]

How Precious! An abrupt abandonment of its claims!

The Reader should take a look at these videos, wherein: Dr. Herb Titus explains "Natural Born Citizen"...

And what evidence does Herb Titus present? For example, I've cited the USSC in Wong Kim Ark. And your youtube video cites.......

....who? I've watched the video. He presents no evidence, cites no cases. He simply says it must be so. Wong Kim Ark says otherwise.

And why the sudden backing away from dictionary definitions? Didn't Doris Wheeler work out for you?

Your evidence has about as much effect on Patriots as ours has on a bunch of Socialist/subversives! Shall we continue....WHAT IS YOUR HOME COUNTRY, Shithook?

My evidence is the United States Supreme Court and English Common Law. The latter being the only source that the founders could have plausible drawn their definition of 'natural born'. As Obama enjoying his second term demonstrates elegantly....your birther ilk have zero impact on Obama's eligibility. And there's is absolultely nothing you can do about it.

Say it with me, Viggy.....'President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama".

Doesn't it just roll off the tongue!

As for my home country, I'll be happy to tell you.....right after you show me a video of Ms. Obama saying Obama was born in Kenya. Because the State of Hawaii clearly says that Obama was born in Honolulu Hawaii.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Keyes will run away again if gets hammered, particularly if he is mocked and ridiculed, which, concerning his racist and sovereign citizen positions, makes a lot of sense.

He is touchy, touchy, touchy. Have fun with his "God is reality, I know God, therefore my posts are objective facts substantiating my position of Truth."

In fact, he is a mutt when it comes to philosophy and critical thinking.

He will cry when you poke him.

No, he does not understand what "Natural Born" means.

Yes, he is a heretic when it comes to Christian doctrines.

And he, along with PoliticalChic, are among the very worst of the online zine and blog posters for their far side bizarro views.

 

[Vigilante]

How Precious! An abrupt abandonment of its claims!

The Reader should take a look at these videos, wherein: Dr. Herb Titus explains "Natural Born Citizen"...

And what evidence does Herb Titus present? For example, I've cited the USSC in Wong Kim Ark. And your youtube video cites.......

....who? I've watched the video. He presents no evidence, cites no cases. He simply says it must be so. Wong Kim Ark says otherwise.

And why the sudden backing away from dictionary definitions? Didn't Doris Wheeler work out for you?

Your evidence has about as much effect on Patriots as ours has on a bunch of Socialist/subversives! Shall we continue....WHAT IS YOUR HOME COUNTRY, Shithook?

My evidence is the United States Supreme Court and English Common Law. The latter being the only source that the founders could have plausible drawn their definition of 'natural born'. As Obama enjoying his second term demonstrates elegantly....your birther ilk have zero impact on Obama's eligibility. And there's is absolultely nothing you can do about it.

Say it with me, Viggy.....'President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama".

Doesn't it just roll off the tongue!

As for my home country, I'll be happy to tell you.....right after you show me a video of Ms. Obama saying Obama was born in Kenya. Because the State of Hawaii clearly says that Obama was born in Honolulu Hawaii.

Money and POWER...The MOOOCH says so! And SCOTUS?...They changed Obumacare into a TAX....UNCONSTITUTIONALLY!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Dr. Herb Titus began throwing away his reputation when he became associated with Regent University, changing his commitment from the law to making money by championing the weird.

 

[Skylar]

Native-born Define Native-born at Dictionary.com

Natural Born... Not "Native Born" , which Dr. Titus explains in the following videos, is a 'Citizen by Birth'.

How Precious! Its running from its own standards again! Its so much fun to watch it desperately scramble away from its own claims!

Page after page of insisting it was dictionary definitions that would tell us the meaning of 'natural born'. And the dictionary is ridiculously clear:

"Natural Born:

.adjective
1. native-born.
2. by virtue of one's nature, qualities, or innate talent:
a natural-born musician.

.Natural born Define Natural born at Dictionary.com

Per the dictionary, Natural Born is Native Born. And when you look up Native Born.......

Native Born:

adjective
1. born in the place or country indicated:
a native-born Australian.

Native-born Define Native-born at Dictionary.com

Exactly as I said, defined by place of birth. Not parentage.

But suddenly it doesn't seem to like the dictionary anymore? It won't even discuss the dictionary.

Laughing! Its so much fun to watch it run!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Vigilante is a racist of the worst sort, the ones who deny it.

He is a lame brained joke of a human being morally.

And a birfer. My goodness.

 

[Unkotare]

I used it 4 times, as it accurately describes the mixed race Racist in the white house...!

How interesting that you seem so uncomfortable having the transparent intention of your block-headed repetition thrown in your face. Maybe you should grow up and choose your words more carefully next time.

Apparently I HURT your female side!...!

Apparently, your powers of perception are as sharp as your wit....

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

How Precious! An abrupt abandonment of its claims!

The Reader should take a look at these videos, wherein: Dr. Herb Titus explains "Natural Born Citizen"...

And what evidence does Herb Titus present? For example, I've cited the USSC in Wong Kim Ark. And your youtube video cites.......

....who? I've watched the video. He presents no evidence, cites no cases. He simply says it must be so. Wong Kim Ark says otherwise.

And why the sudden backing away from dictionary definitions? Didn't Doris Wheeler work out for you?

Your evidence has about as much effect on Patriots as ours has on a bunch of Socialist/subversives! Shall we continue....WHAT IS YOUR HOME COUNTRY, Shithook?

LOL! True...

But the only 'evidence' she has produced is that she is incapable of objective reason... and sadly, where such is the case, objective reference resources are of little use. This is why book burning is one of the more consistent traits in Relativist cultures. Anyone even remotely familiar with Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Histler, Mussolini, Castro, The Kims of North Korea and the US Left which have effectively banned the teaching of History through objective resource material, FULLY understands that the Ideological Left is incapable of objectivity... and that is why Leftist cultures fail everywhere they're tried.

Because: They must...

Absent objectivity, there can be no truth. Without truth, there can be no trust. Without Trust there can be no morality and without Truth, trust and morality it is impossible to serve justice. And absent justice, anarchy ensues and society crashes.

And THAT is why every culture which has tolerated, thus 'normalizes' abnormal (perverse) reasoning, does so in the final hours of its doom.

The moral of the story is NEVER tolerate Leftism... it's simple foolishness and that's truly all there is to it.

 

[Skylar]

The phrase at issue is "Natural Born Citizen"... which, despite your subjective needs that such be synonymous with Native Born, it is NOT!

And what evidence does Mr. Titus use to back this assertion?

Who is he quoting? Because I'm not quoting myself on the meaning of 'natural born'. I'm quoting the USSC, which cites common law as necessary to understand the meaning of the language of the constitution:

"There is no common law of the United States, in the sense of a national customary law, distinct from the common law of England as adopted by the several States each for itself, applied as its local law, and subject to such alteration as may be provided by its own statutes. . . . There is, however, one clear exception to the statement that there is no national common law. The interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history."

Wong Kim Ark v. US (1898)

And using English Common Law, cites natural born status as following place of birth, even if a child's parents are both aliens:

The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called "ligealty," "obedience," "faith," or "power" of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King's allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual -- as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem -- and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects. But the children, born within the realm, of foreign ambassadors, or the children of alien enemies, born during and within their hostile occupation of part of the King's dominions, were not natural-born subjects because not born within the allegiance, the obedience, or the power, or, as would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction, of the King.

Wong Kim Ark v. US (1898)

And the evidence presented by Mr. Titus to back his claim is.......what? Which cases does he cite? Which evidence does he present?

I've watched the video. He presents none.

Why would an objective person ignore the Supreme Court of the United States, English Common Law and the dictionary...in favor of a youtube video?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Vigilante has nothing on tape saying that Michelle said her husband was born in Kenya.

 

[Vigilante]

Vigilante is a racist of the worst sort, the ones who deny it.

He is a lame brained joke of a human being morally.

And a birfer. My goodness.

I will give you this....you do make me laugh. Mainstream republican!!

Hell, Son, I'm closer to looking like a polar bear than you are to a republican.......

 

[Porker]

4 SUPREME COURT CASES DEFINE4 NATURAL BORN CITIZEN Updated May 25 2012 Four Winds 10 - Truth Winds

4 SUPREME COURT CASES DEFINE4 'NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'(Updated May 25, 2012)

IRREFUTABLE AUTHORITY HAS SPOKEN
(Oct. 18, 2009) — The Post & Email has in several articles mentioned that the Supreme Court of the United States has given the definition of what a “natural born citizen” is. Since being a natural born citizen is an objective qualification and requirement of office for the U.S. President, it is important for all U.S. Citizens to undertsand what this term means.

Let’s cut through all the opinion and speculation, all the “he says”, “she says”, fluff, and go right to the irrefutable, constitutional authority on all terms and phrases mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: the Supreme Court of the United States.

First, let me note that there are 4 such cases which speak of the notion of “natural born citizenship”.

Each of these cases will cite or apply the definition of this term, as given in a book entitled, The Law of Nations, written byEmmerich de Vattel, a Swiss-German philosopher of law. In that book, the following definition of a “natural born citizen” appears, in Book I, Chapter 19, § 212, of the English translation of 1797 (p. 110):

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. . . .

The French original of 1757, on that same passage read thus:

Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pays de parents citoyens, . . .

The terms “natives” and “natural born citizens” are obviously English terms; used to render the idea convyed by the French phrase “les naturels, ou indigenes”: but both refered to the same category of citizen: one born in the country, of parents who were citizens of that country.

In the political philosophy of Vattel, the term “naturels” refers to citizens who are such by the Law of Nature, that is by the natural cirumstances of their birth — which they did not choose; the term “indigenes” is from the Latin, indigenes, which like the English, “indigenous”, means “begotten from within” (inde-genes), as in the phrase “the indigenous natives are the peoples who have been born and lived there for generations.” Hence the meaning the the term, “natural born citizen”, or “naturels ou indigenes” is the same: born in the country of two parents who are citizens of that country.

Vattel did not invent the notion “natural born citizen”; he was merely applying the Law of Nature to questions of citizenship. In fact the term first appears in a letter of the future Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, to George Washington during the Constitutional Convention, where the Framers were consulting 3 copies Vattel’s book to complete their work (according to the testimony of Benjamin Franklin).

Let take a brief look, now, at each case. For each case I include the link to the full text of the ruling.

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
The first was decided in A.D. 1814, at the beginning of the republic, by men who were intimately associated with the American Revolution. In that year the following men sat on the Supreme Court:

Bushrod Washington, (b. June 5, 1762 — d. Nov. 26, 1829), served Feb. 4, 1799 til Nov. 26, 1829.

John Marshall (b. Sept. 24, 1755 — d. July 6, 1835), served Feb. 4, 1891 til July 6, 1835.

William Johnson (b. Dec. 27, 1771 — d. Aug. 4, 1834), served May 7, 1804, til Aug. 4, 1834.

Henry Brockholst Livingston (b. Nov. 25, 1757 — d. Mar. 18, 1823), served Jan. 20, 1807 til March 18, 1823

Thomas Todd (b. Jan. 23, 1765 — d. Feb. 7, 1826), served May 4, 1807 til Feb. 7, 1826.

Gabriel Duvall (b. Dec. 6, 1752 — d. Mar. 6, 1844), served Nov. 23, 1811 til Jany 14, 1835.

Joseph Story (b. Sept. 18, 1779 — d. Sept. 10, 1845), served Feb. 3, 1812 til Sept. 10, 1845

Nearly all these men either participated in the American Revolution, or their fathers did. Joseph Story’s father took part in the original Boston Tea Party. Thomas Todd served 6 months in the army against the British; and participated in 5 Constitutional Conventions from 1784-1792. During the Revolutionary War, Henry Brockholst Livingston was a Lieutenant Colonel in the New York Line and an aide-de-camp to General Benedict Arnold, before the latter’s defection to the British. William Johnson’sfather, mother, and elder brother were revolutionaries, who served as statesman, rebel, or nurse/assistant to the line troops, respectively. John Marshall was First Lieutenant of the Culpeper Minutement of Virginia, and then Lieutenant in the Eleventh Virginian Continental Regiment, and a personal friend of General George Washington; and debated for ratification of the U.S. Constitution by the Virginian General Assembly. Bushrod Washington was George Washington’s nephew and heir.

Being witnesses and heirs of the Revolution, they understood what the Framers of the Constitution had intended.

The Venus case regarded the question whether the cargo of a merchantman, named the Venus, belonging to an American citizen, and being shipped from British territory to America during the War of 1812, could be seized and taken as a prize by an American privateer. But what the case said about citizenship, is what matters here.

WHAT THE VENUS CASE SAYS ON CITIZENSHIP

In the Venus Case, Justice Livingston, who wrote the unanimous decision, quoted the entire §212nd paragraph from the French edition, using his own English, on p. 12 of the ruling:

Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says:

“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
In 16 years later the Supreme Court heard the case regarding the dispute over the inheritance received by two daughters of an American colonist, from South Carolina; one of whom went to England and remained a British subject, the other of whom remained in South Carolina and became an American citizen. At the beginning of the case, Justice Story, who gave the ruling, does not cite Vattel per se, but cites the principle of citizenship enshrined in his definition of a “natural born citizen”:

Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
This case concerned Mrs. Happersett, an original suffragette, who in virtue of the 14th Amendment attempted to register to vote in the State of Missouri, and was refused because she was not a man. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in that year, wrote the majority opinion, in which he stated:

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.

UPDATE: May 25, 2012

In your above article, which is very good, there is one error that you may wish to correct. In the Minor v. Happersett case, you refer to Mrs.Happersett as though she was the plaintiff. This is incorrect. The plaintiff was Virginia Minor. Happersett was the Registrar of Voters. I would appreciate your acknowledgment of my email. Thank you. Bruce O. Mann Attorney at Law 26875 Calle Hermosa, Ste. 1Capistrano Beach, CA 92624

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
In this case, Wong Kim Ark, the son of 2 resident Chinese aliens, claimed U.S. Citizenship and was vindicated by the court on the basis of the 14th Amendment. In this case the Justice Gray gave the opinion of the court. On p. 168-9 of the record, He cites approvingly the decision in Minor vs. Happersett:

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

On the basis of the 14th Amendment, however, the majority opinion coined a new definition for “native citizen”, as anyone who was born in the U.S.A., under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Court gave a novel interpretation to jurisdiction, and thus extended citizenship to all born in the country (excepting those born of ambassadors and foreign armies etc.); but it did not extend the meaning of the term “natural born citizen.”

CONCLUSION
Finally it should be noted, that to define a term is to indicate the category or class of things which it signifies. In this sense, the Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

Hence every U.S. Citizen must accept this definition or categorical designation, and fulfil his constitutional duties accordingly. No member of Congress, no judge of the Federal Judiciary, no elected or appointed official in Federal or State government has the right to use any other definition; and if he does, he is acting unlawfully, because unconstitutionally.

4 Supreme Court Cases define natural born citizen The Post Email

 

[JakeStarkey]

As long as the Vigilantes are isolated on the far right away from the mainstream of voters, America is quite safe. He can yuck it up with the Keys and PCs and the other defuncts of our society.