I agree
Voting is Disabled

-15 votes

I disagree

Rank30701

Idea#4121

This idea is active.
Uncategorized »

My Mother Was a US Citizen

Why Is This Idea Important?: That's all that's important to me.

It doesn't matter where I was born. My birth certificate is irrelevant. The truth is written in blood. I'm a US Citizen by the blood of my mother that flows in my veins.

Article. II.

Section. 1.

. . .

Clause 5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

. . .

"natural born Citizen"

A birthing issued by a mother, who's a US Citizen, is as natural as it gets. The place where that birth took place is irrelevant. Why the silly denial of natural reality?

For some, it's no longer about the constitution but about the unspecified [imaginary?] Supreme Court rulings [interpretations like Plessy v. Ferguson] by conservative activist judges?

"Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in the jurisprudence of the United States, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation even in public accommodations (particularly railroads), under the doctrine of "separate but equal".

"The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1, with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan. Justice David Josiah Brewer did not participate in the decision. "Separate but equal" remained standard doctrine in U.S. law until its repudiation in the 1954 Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education." - Wikipedia

agkaiser.org

Submitted by agkaiser1 2 years ago

Vote Activity Show

Comments (28)

  1. tsiya said:

    According to the Constitution it does matter. Do you think you can ignore the law just because you don't like it?

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  2. agkaiser1 said:

    Article. II.

    Section. 1.

    . . .

    Clause 5: No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

    . . .

    "natural born Citizen"

    A birthing issued by a mother, who's a US Citizen, is as natural as it gets. The place where that birth took place is irrelevant. Why the silly denial of natural reality?

    agkaiser.org

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  3. we_spencer said:

    Here are a few fools that think they can take one.

    It is funny that BHO voted in the senate that McCain is "Natural Born" being that both PARENTS were U.S. citizens and that the Supreme Court ruled that one parent being able to convey citizenship of a foreign country leaves the child's natural born status "In Doubt".

    You are right . . . it does not matter where he was born . . . it just matters that both parents were U.S. citizens at the time of the child's birth. Oops! Or would it be better stated Doh!

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  4. Big Rooster said:

    we_spencer, some people just don't get it because they don't want to get it...

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  5. agkaiser1 said:

    For some, it's no longer about the constitution but about the unspecified [imaginary?] Supreme Court rulings [interpretations like Plessy v. Ferguson] by conservative activist judges?

    "Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896), is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in the jurisprudence of the United States, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation even in public accommodations (particularly railroads), under the doctrine of "separate but equal".

    "The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1, with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan. Justice David Josiah Brewer did not participate in the decision. "Separate but equal" remained standard doctrine in U.S. law until its repudiation in the 1954 Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education." - Wikipedia

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  6. Big Rooster said:

    This is kinda long, but it should be able to get your head right if you can read...this post is what got Blackman licker to get off the subject pretty much entirely.

    Ya'll know that if I could get him to be quiet with this...there has got to be something to it.

    http://people.mags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  7. agkaiser1 said:

    I've quoted the US Constitution verbatim and cited actual Supreme Court Ruling. A great chicken links to People Magazine and wants others to get their minds right. I never did like Luke's warden.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  8. Big Rooster said:

    If that is what makes you sleep better...you don't have to look at the facts or go to the website. the link it is not what you think it is obviously you didn't go there...and you only quoted a small part of what you think is all of the laws surrounding this.

    Would it have made you feel better if I had copy and pasted as you did...I am so impressed with your skills.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  9. Big Rooster said:

    What we have here is failure to communicate...some men you just can't reach...so you get what we have here today which is the way you want it...well, you get it...

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  10. agkaiser1 said:

    There are authorities that provide valuable citations. There are popular sensationalist media on which one doesn't waste time.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  11. Big Rooster said:

    I just ran that through an interpreter program on my computer and is said "I am an idiot that doesn't want Big Rooster to show me the truth because that would make me wrong".

    You ask for proof and refuse to look at it. I will not try to copy and paste the whole thing as it is too large to put it on here in one post. It is not just an article you moron.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  12. Big Rooster said:

    By your definition, Vladimir Putin could get his wife (Lyudmila) pregnant and come over here when she is about to deliver...have the kid here in the states...go back to Russia until the child it fully schooled in the Russian/communist way of life...and later that kid can run for POTUS at 35?

    Not to mention it would be an anchor baby that would give them all of our rights to our government that diplomatic immunity doesn't already give them...I sure am glad we have people like you that try so hard to run this country into the ground at break neck speeds...you act like if you were right it would be great for us...what an idiot.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  13. gypsy_sage said:

    He was made a citizen of Indonesia by his step father....It states "according to their law", that you have to be a citizen of that country to attend their schools........And thats not the only issue....everything this guy and his administration is doing is communistic and anti-American.....We dont need or, want a communist gov. here and, we are not obligated to ghange our constitution or, instill a 'New Bill Of Rights" to cater to him or his traitor administration...I like my Bill of Rights......THANK YOU VERY MUCH

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  14. kandis1105 said:

    Charles Pinckney (signer of the U.S. Constitution) in 1800 said the presidential eligibility clause was designed “to insure … attachment to the country.”

    What better way to insure attachment to the country then to require the President to have inherited his American citizenship through his American father and not through a foreign father. Any child can be born anywhere in the country and removed by their father to be raised in his native country. The risks would be for the child to return in later life to reside in this country bringing with him foreign influences and intrigues.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  15. Big Rooster said:

    agkaiser1, tell us what you know about dual citizenship...go ahead and enlighten us oh wise one.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  16. Big Rooster said:

    kandis1105, thank you for that accurate bit of information.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  17. gypsy_sage said:

    agkaiser,

    I believe that people can come here from another country or, be born to American parents and still be good citizens but, in my experiences of growing up in an area that allows one or, two nationalities of peoples " literally to, invade most of a city and its suburbs" with people who 1,refuse to learn the language of that land 2,refuse to learn/obey the laws of that land 3,fly their flags instead of the American flag...It proves that, the politicians/police/immigration officials in that area are disloyal to their own country.....These people(illegal immigrants and some that have gotten citizenship through buying the test they are to take to get the citizenship) are actually loyal to the country they came from and are not interested in loyalty to the U.S.....If they were not loyal to the country they came from, they would fly the American flag and give alliegance to country that is giving them all of the opportunity and freedom...As far as your mother...I have seen that many foreign nationals,,,raise their children to be loyal to the plece in the parents came from....And their ways...even political...

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  18. tsiya said:

    Actually, Putin couldn't be much worse than what we have now. He might even respect the Constitution more.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  19. Big Rooster said:

    In the news it was reported that Putin warned Obama about letting the government get involved in areas that it should stay out of.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  20. gypsy_sage said:

    Arrogance/greed/lust for power will cause people to do evil things to get, and then, keep power. Many of the leaders /idols, that obama is trying to imitate, have never done anything good for the world or, their people. So, I know that he & the people who are using him and, protecting him have only bad intentions for anyone who opposes them...There is no logical reason for someone who has even limited common sense to use the tactics and, twisted mentality that these people possess.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  21. Big Rooster said:

    But look at who democrats choose to be the targeted voters for them. They can't think for themselves so it is easier for them to vote on an empty promise of riches.

    Those that can think for themselves and have an ounce of pride knows what lies are being told and also knows that you have to do for yourself...if you wait for success it will never show up.

    All democrats are bottom feeders. Do they really think that Obama considers himself as one of them?

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  22. we_spencer:

    The Supreme Court never said the citizenship of an individual with one American parent was in doubt. They said that some people doubt the any child born is a citizen standard. The justices declined to rule on which standard applied in that case. The subject of the case had two citizen parents, so there was no need to rule.

    The Supreme Court has upheld the any child born in the country regardless of parentage standard in many cases.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  23. Big Rooster said:

    We are talking about POTUS elegibility though so that really doesn't matter now does it.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  24. gypsy_sage said:

    You know its illegal to legislate from the bench dont you? We have 3 groups/branches of gov.Legislative/Judicial/executive..........One is not supposed to infringe on the others duty...Any judge that breaks the law can and should be impeached and removed....

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  25. Presidential eligibility too.

    The words "natural born citizen" were well defined in law at the time of the framing. We should go by what can be learned or deduced of the intent of the framers. When one writes a legal document, he assumes the definitions in the law will be applied when questions about the document arise. The founding fathers knew very well what natural born citizen meant. It meant any child born in the country whose parents were not ambassadors or invading soldiers.

    "natural born citizen" is defined in other Supreme Court cases. The birthers know better but just choose to be wrong about this to be difficult.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  26. Big Rooster said:

    There is a big difference between being eligible to be a citizen and being eligible to be the POTUS...well at least until Obama came along.

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  27. gypsy_sage said:

    Well I only became a birfer after seeing how arrogant he is about it......Of course Im not shocked...

    2 years ago
    0
    0
  28. Big Rooster said:

    gypsy, please use the "th", it tends to add credibility to your post...

    2 years ago
    0
    0