Text 43723, 103 rader
Skriven 2006-12-05 16:57:11 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
  Kommentar till text 43716 av LEE LOFASO (1:123/140)
Ärende: Mystifying Citizenship
==============================
05 Dec 06 14:21, LEE LOFASO wrote to ROY WITT:

 LL> Hello Roy,

 >>RW> Part of the law:

 >>RW> "The term "natural born Citizen" includes children born outside the
 >>RW> United States to citizen parents.  This provision provides comfort
 >>RW> and certainty to members of the American military and foreign
 >>RW> services, as well as expatriate families, that their children, too,
 >>RW> are eligible to run for president.  These children are no less
 >>RW> qualified than children born on American soil, and they should not
 >>RW> be treated differently.  Of course, children born to American
 >>RW> citizens abroad would only be eligible to run for president if they
 >>RW> satisfied the fourteen year residency requirement in addition to
 >>RW> the "natural born" requirement."

 >>LL> Part of the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND:

 RW>> Not so SUPREME as it turns out.

 LL> Oh?  Roy's Law supercedes the U.S. Constitution?  I don't think so...

Stupid is as stupid says, I always say. You've just proven that it's not a
myth.

 >>LL> Article II, Section I, Clause IV

 >>LL> ELIGIBILITY FOR OFFICE OF PRESIDENT

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

 >>LL> Naturally, THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND trumps whatever "law" you
 >>LL> quoted.

 RW>> Nope. The SUPREME law of the land allows the legislative branch of
 RW>> the governmen to make and pass such laws as deemed required by said
 RW>> branch. Thus, these laws are upheld by said SUPREME law of the land.

 LL> No law that is unconstitutional is constitutional.

No shit, Little Beaver. When did you get your first clue?

 LL> Regardless of who writes that unconstitutional law.

Any law may be unconstitutional, but it will be law non the less. That is
until tried before a court of law, not on your say so. As you may not be
aware, there have been many constitutional tests of laws in the last 230
years. Some were upheld, others were shot down.

 >>LL> The U.S. Constitution says quite plainly that if an individual has
 >>LL> not been born on U.S. soil, that individual is not eligible to
 >>LL> serve as president or vice president.

 RW>> Subsequent laws passed under said Constitution are just as supreme
 RW>> as the Constitution that allowed them to become law. If you don't
 RW>> think so, you should challenge said laws before the next branch of
 RW>> government, the US court system.

 LL> A law that is unconstitutional is unconstitutional.  Why is that?

Because it was determined by a court of law to be so. Not because you
or anyone else say so.

 LL> Because no law can supercede the U.S. Constitution.  Why not?
 LL> Because the U.S. Constitution is THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND.  That's
 LL> why.

Is that so! How about the laws that allow a police officer to search your
vehicle without a warrant, in violation of the 4th amemdment?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be
violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported
by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

However, in practice this means that the police may override your privacy
concerns and conduct a search of your home, barn, car, boat, office,
personal or business documents, bank account records, trash barrel, or
whatever, if:

    * the police have probable cause to believe they can find evidence
      that you committed a crime, and a judge issues a search warrant, or

    * the particular circumstances justify the search without a warrant
      first being issued.

Do your homework because the next question will be about the gun control
laws in violation of the 2nd Amendment.

               R\%/itt




--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:397/22)