• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Associated Press: Arizona Senate Approves 'Birther' Bill

CriticalThought said:
I have yet to see any evidence that Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen, only speculation that he is not. Why should I believe something without any evidence to support it?
Click to expand...

Well. is he a ' native born citizen' or is he a 'natural born citizen? What do you think?
 
Apuzo said:
Well. is he a ' native born citizen' or is he a 'natural born citizen? What do you think?
Click to expand...

His mother was a citizen when he was born, so it doesn't matter where he was born, he's a citizen.

/topic
 
Jerry said:
His mother was a citizen when he was born, so it doesn't matter where he was born, he's a citizen.

/topic
Click to expand...

But what kind of citizen do you think he is? Native Born, Natural Born or Naturalized?
 
Apuzo said:
So what kind of citizen is he then? Native Born, Natural Born or Naturalized?
Click to expand...
I don't know you, but Obama was born in the U.S. like you probably were, so to you he is whatever you are. :mrgreen:
 
Jetboogieman said:
Ok.

I stepped away from the racism.

My point is.

Those who attack Obama on his citizenship are 99.9% of the Right wing persuasion.

Not people to usually go after "their" own president.

We can't say what really might have happened if McCain were president, but my guess his citizenship would not have been an issue, that's my only point.
Click to expand...

McCain released his full birth certificate i think... so that kind of ended it there
 
Apuzo said:
So what kind of citizen is he then? Native Born, Natural Born or Naturalized?
Click to expand...

It's not a mystery, he's both. They are not mutually exclusive. He was born in the US, not under any other jurisdiction, and is nothing but a citizen.
 
celticwar17 said:
McCain released his full birth certificate i think... so that kind of ended it there
Click to expand...

No, it ended because there were no nutters who wouldn't accept any evidence. :coffeepap
 
The Canal Zone....in other words Zonians.

Born in Panama.....yet Americans. Many have dual citizenship (US & Panama)
 
Apuzo said:
But what kind of citizen do you think he is? Native Born, Natural Born or Naturalized?
Click to expand...
How about your provide the authoritative and established criteria for "native born" and "natural born" and then we can see?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
That exception separates naturalized Americans from natural born Americans.

ludahai said:
no... it refers to people who were citizens when the Constitution came into effect...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Ummm, yeah, that's what I said -- they were naturalized citizens, as opposed to being natural born citizens.

ludahai said:
... Obama isn't THAT old...
Click to expand...
Who said the grandfather clause applied to Obama? The natural born citizen clause applies to him.
 
Apuzo said:
But what kind of citizen do you think he is? Native Born, Natural Born or Naturalized?
Click to expand...
U.S. citizens at birth are both. Either by jus soli or jus sanguini.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
How about your provide the authoritative and established criteria for "native born" and "natural born" and then we can see?
Click to expand...
For what it's worth, here's an online definition:

nat·u·ral-born

1. native-born.​

I have a feeling Apuzo isn't going to accept that. Call it a hunch.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
It's not really authoritative in re our constitution. AFAICT, this matter hasn't been specifically ruled on.
Click to expand...

On July 28, 2009, Hawaii Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino issued a statement saying, "I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen."[76] On July 27, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.Res. 593, commemorating the 50th anniversary of Hawaii's statehood, including the text, "Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961".[77] The vote passed 378-0.[

Natural Born Citizen Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Simon W. Moon said:
It's not really authoritative in re our constitution. AFAICT, this matter hasn't been specifically ruled on.
Click to expand...
True enough, but the commonly accepted application of the term seems to apply to any person who is constitutionally considered a U.S. citizen at birth. And by "commonly accepted" I mean by our government. Obama is now the second president we've had whose father was not a U.S. citizen at the time of their respective births.
 
Boo Radley said:
On July 28, 2009, Hawaii Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino issued a statement saying, "I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen."[76] On July 27, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.Res. 593, commemorating the 50th anniversary of Hawaii's statehood, including the text, "Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961".[77] The vote passed 378-0.[

Natural Born Citizen Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...
While I have great respect for Dr. Fukino and empathize with her having to deal with the nutty birfers, I don't view her as an authority either to declare Obama a natural born citizen. Only the U.S.S.C. is in a position to do that.
 
ludahai said:
The state of Arizona is not imposing a new requirement to be president of the United States. It is merely codifying means to verify that said person actually meets the qualifications that are outlined in the Constitution of the United States. Elections for electors are STATE affairs and as such, the state has the right to verify that any candidate meets the requirements. No potential candidate who does NOT meet the requirements should be allowed to register in ANY state. This law merely gives election officials in the states the means to verify eligibility. Nothing more.
Click to expand...

By default, no state has any requirements to get on their presidential ballot, and the federal requirements are looked at by the FEDERAL government once the electoral college makes its decision. Now, if Arizona wants to pass a law that says "You have to be 35 years old, 14 years in US residency, and a natural-born citizen to qualify for Arizona's presidential ballot," they can do so. Those would be NEW requirements that the STATE is imposing to qualify for the state ballot. What they can't do is try to do the federal government's job and verify federal requirements, nor can they impose verification measures that make it relatively more difficult for certain classes of eligible candidates to get on the ballot.
 
Last edited:
ludahai said:
Are you sure about this? Care to provide evidence of this claim as it is quite central to the argument that this proposed Arizona law is not needed...
Click to expand...

That's the job of the Joint Session of Congress that certifies the electoral college's results. If there is any question about the impropriety of what the electors have done (such as select someone to be president who does not meet the constitutional requirement), a representative and a senator must sign an objection and present it to the President of the Senate. Congress will then hear the objections, listen to any evidence that the congresspeople have that the electors acted improperly, and then vote on it.

A majority of the electoral college and of both houses of Congress all agreed that President Obama was eligible to be president. In fact, Congress didn't even entertain any objections that he was not eligible, during this joint session.
 
Last edited:
Sheik Yerbuti said:

Ummm, yeah, that's what I said -- they were naturalized citizens, as opposed to being natural born citizens.


Who said the grandfather clause applied to Obama? The natural born citizen clause applies to him.
Click to expand...

You are missing the point. Someone (forgot who and I am not going back through this thread) pointed out that Washington and others were NOT born in the US because there WAS no US. The exception in the Constitution regarding them has to do with those who were citizens when the Constitution was adopted.

I know the natural born citizen clause applies to him. I am not a birther. Even if he was a dual national at birth, 1. I have no problem with this and 2. he would STILL be a natural born citizen under the concept of jus soli which has a long history in English common law that predates the U.S. Constitution and would have been what the Founders would have been informed by when they wrote the clause into the Constitution.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
True enough, but the commonly accepted application of the term seems to apply to any person who is constitutionally considered a U.S. citizen at birth. And by "commonly accepted" I mean by our government. Obama is now the second president we've had whose father was not a U.S. citizen at the time of their respective births.
Click to expand...

Not only that, it was commonly accepted as a matter of common law even before the Constitution was ratified.
 
It is clear this should be a federal law.

Once again Arizona leads the way.

Only ignorant liberals would oppose this.

It was one of those oversights in the Constitution.

This will insurer Obama is a one term failure. I think there needs to be a jail term tp go along with it.

I would love to see Obama do a few years, as in life without payroll.
 
rocket88 said:
The Founding Fathers were long dead before Chet Arthur came along. They neither allowed nor prevented him from taking office.

At any rate, the birthplace of the parents is immaterial. The 14th Amendment grants citizenship to all people born in the United States. No law has ever been passed stating that this is not "natural born" citizenship. In fact, I'm not aware of a law that has been passed defining what a "natural born citizen" is. It's largely been assumed to mean "citizen since birth," which would apply to a person born in the US regardless of their parents' respective citizenships.

The question then is, does Arizona have the right to decide this? Legally, the States regulate the elections and the rules around it. But could you imagine the chaos surrounding a Presidential election if every State had different candidates? And what happens if a person is considered a "natural born citizen" by say, Hawaii, but not by Arizona? Not just in terms of who can be President, but in any legal case where a person's citizenship applies? Would that person need a passport to change planes in Phoenix?
Click to expand...

I can imagine the Democrats having a hell of a time trying to jiggy up an election. :lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom