by Dan Crosby
of the Daily Pen
NEW YORK, NY - It
requires a truly reprobate mind that causes one to refuse the preeminent
definition of natural-born citizenship as it was divinely understood by the framers.
They declared the Constitutional eligibility mandate in the critical time which
required it...and forever more, because, by moral convention, it was simply normal and common to them.
Willful ignorance and
shame consumes the ideologue unwilling to accept that those, existing centuries
before them, more favored by God, declared natural-born eligibility from a righteous perspective
rooted in an eyewitness understanding of the need to disqualify tyranny born of
foul parentage, primarily, not just geographic origin.
The founders saw firsthand
that Monarchal inbreeding put sovereignty at risk, so they refused to allow
that risk to take hold their new nation. War mongers abound, boundaries are
indefensible, but blood-ransomed thrones are not. The founders foreknew borders
could be created and changed and be violated, but parentage is eternally
founded in the natural laws of God and, therefore, so is natural-born citizenship.
Hence, Article II was born.
Only liars and reprobates
remain dissonant to this universal truth because they can't let go of their
fetish for a transient celebrity everyone else will soon forget.
Yet, the misguided belief that
Obama's eligibility hinges only upon a geographic natal origin fails foolishly
when mortally impaled by two facts: Obama, himself, voted to uphold SR 511
which declared his 2008 opponent, John McCain a Natural Born citizen explicitly
because McCain was born to two citizen parents. There is simply no remedy available to Obots for this teeth-gnashing reality..
Why did Obama and so
many of his esteemed degenerates not disqualify the Panamanian-born McCain?
Because, the question of McCain's natural-born eligibility was resolved as a
matter of natural law founded in PARENTAGE and natal identity, not his birth
within transient geographic boundaries from which anyone may be removed or
enter from anywhere at any time.
If the question of natural-born citizenship is merely endowed by the location upon earth one's mother is when she gives birth, where lies the contribution to the child's natural born citizenship by the father? What if the father is not present? Certainly we are all born of two parents insofar as the laws of nature dictate.
This is why it was declared that the father's citizenship defines the citizenship of his children, not the mother's. Natural law makes the absence of the mother at birth impossible but it does not prevent the absence of the father. Therefore, because God made them one flesh, this rendered her unable to pass natural-born citizenship to the child alone, based only on geographic birth place, when, in the event she gave birth in a foreign land. In such cases, the child could not be a natural born citizen, but could retain the citizenship and estate of the father.
Therefore, it was declared by the laws of man, as modeled after the laws of God, the father's citizenry is the citizenry of the child, regardless of the location of the mother at birth. But, even more importantly, full natural-born citizenship must be defined both by parentage and birth place.
Should we desire a lesser standard for our highest office of leadership? Should we decompensate the utmost expectations of our commander-in-chief? Who would dare say the President must be considered to a lesser measure? Who would dare say the blood ransom paid to fortify our sovereignty should be represented by a minimalist rendering of character in our highest office? When inferior men, though beloved by a bowing consensus, seek that office, shall we diminish the requirements to meet the man? Or should the man be made to meet the highest of the requirements for the sake of our place among nations...and God?
Should we desire a lesser standard for our highest office of leadership? Should we decompensate the utmost expectations of our commander-in-chief? Who would dare say the President must be considered to a lesser measure? Who would dare say the blood ransom paid to fortify our sovereignty should be represented by a minimalist rendering of character in our highest office? When inferior men, though beloved by a bowing consensus, seek that office, shall we diminish the requirements to meet the man? Or should the man be made to meet the highest of the requirements for the sake of our place among nations...and God?
If Obama’s only claim to eligibility
is that he was born in a geographic region under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Constitution, then why did he vote in support of a resolution declaring the
natural-born eligibility of man who was NOT born in a geographic region under
the jurisdiction of the U.S. Constitution?
Because, he is found to be inferior when measured against the natural born citizenship mark. The law will not be deceived. It can only be violated and upheld as justice. The law has an unrelenting grip upon Obama soul and mind. His only option is to lie about who he really is while casting his own dilemma onto others. He is a deceiver, through and through.
Because, he is found to be inferior when measured against the natural born citizenship mark. The law will not be deceived. It can only be violated and upheld as justice. The law has an unrelenting grip upon Obama soul and mind. His only option is to lie about who he really is while casting his own dilemma onto others. He is a deceiver, through and through.
Second, the framers of the
Constitution explicitly differentiated language with regard for natural-born citizenship
from mere common citizenship as an exaction of two absolutes founded in the
natural laws of God, not the laws of man. Having only recently established this
new nation, they were at a disadvantage, militarily, to defend it’s borders
from invasion, indefinitely. However, they could defend the sovereignty of
their new government and, therefore, the strength of their constitutional
resolve by declaring that the President be a natural born citizen in the common
sense, by citizenship of their parentage. For no parents who were citizens of
the U.S. in 1787 could conspicuously bear a foreign child to raised among the
"brethren" and, later, betray the blood of patriots by becoming a
tyrant unopposed. His parentage was an indicator of his loyalty and intentions.
Therefore, in these two
precedents, it was never in doubt (Minor v. Happ.) that 1.) God made man and
woman and that 2.) they shall become one flesh in bearing children…and in their
identity, the child too could be called a naturally-born citizen as well. Thus
sovereignty is upheld as much as possible in this manner.
This ancient law of
natural born identity precedes any case law, by millenniums. From the moment
God took a rib from Adam and created woman, Obama's fate as an illegitimate
president was sealed. The founders simply defeated him 250 years before he had
the chance to impose his vile deceptions. The time in which we are born is
another unfortunate result of natural born identity. We don't chose who, when
or where our parents are. They are a product of God's natural laws.
Natural Law was in effect
from the beginning of time and was merely upheld by the framers through
declaring the Constitutional requirements of eligibility to be president
because they understood that sovereignty by geography was tenuous and
morphological whereas birth to one's parents was immutable and unchangeable.
God's law, as so upheld by our Constitution, disqualifies Obama from ever being
legitimate as a president regardless of any random, corporal birth place
because he was the "one flesh" of foreign parentage.
Upon the foul precipice
that natural born citizenship is determined ONLY by geographic birth place , a
foreign enemy may circumvent the standards endowed by generations of bloodshed
and sacrifice, enter the nation illegally, bear a child on our soil, take the
child back to their foreign land, raise him apart from decency under all manner
of foul doctrine and hate, then return him to the nation to usurp power without
any verification of intention as to his interest in our welfare or by loyalty
to our sovereignty.
Did we learn nothing from
the scourge of Austrian-born usurper in 1930’s Germany? Only atrocity and hate
can result from Obama’s violations of natural law. His natal geography is
ridiculous and shallow in providing any credible evidence of his natural-born
citizenry because nations will rise and fall, but the natural laws of parentage
remain forever! Blood sovereignty, familial heritage and the roots of
natural-born identity are defined by generations of parental consummation, not
momentary residence in a remote outpost way out in the Pacific Ocean.
This law is as preeminent
as it is final. Upon the laws of God, all debate in this matter comes to a dark
and empty apocalypse with the losers left alone in their defense of a lie which
is now exposed by divine truth...and Hell is at hand.
It is imperative that America
reject Obama and all case law citations in favor of geographic-based definitions
of natural born citizenship, because they have no authority over the truth.
LET US PRAY FOR " HOPE AND CHANGE " BACK TO THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE , RESTORATION OF OUR REPUBLIC
ReplyDeleteAND RESPECT FOR OUR CONSTITUTION.