In response to:

GOP Rep. to Birther at Town Hall Meeting: "Honestly, I Don't Even Give a S***"

AnneG Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 9:57 AM
David, that was changed years ago to be parent as an amendment. Quit already. He's president, like it or not. Do something useful.
TeaPartySmith Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 11:27 AM
Give it up, Earl. You're talking to a fence post. "Natural law" says blacks are I inferior to whites, woman are inferior to men, and poor are inferior to rich. After all, those same Founding Fathers wanted their class to be the only ones to vote, precluded voting by women, and held slaves.

Moreover, the entire concept is bogus. A citizen is a citizen. I think a person who immigrates and becomes American is at least as likely to be loyal to this country. Conversely, if I want to find a Manchurian Candidate, there are plenty of "Natural Born" citizens who would like to do damage. The whole issue is stupid, and that's why normal people don't give a sh!t about it.
Earl29 Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 10:38 AM
The law of human nature says the father is more important than the mother?
davidfarrar Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 10:27 AM
Of course not, it is simply the law of human nature. The value of using natural law in the political setting of defining citizenship is based on the fact that it is immutable, as I mentioned above. It doesn't change over time, which is preciously why the Founders, Framers and Ratifiers of the US Const., who had a palpable fear of the Republic reverting back to an elective monarchy (and eventually an hereditary one) used it as a qualification for the presidency, rather than a 'US citizen' at birth.

ex animo
Earl29 Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 10:09 AM
The natural law is that fathers are more important than mothers?
davidfarrar Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 10:02 AM
Statutory law cannot and does not create or change natural law, my friend. Moreover, only we the people can change the US Constitution, not Congress.

ex animo