Why must Presidential candidates be U.S. born?

[kaizersose]

Originally posted by: Bigdude
I'm all for the law, and I would like it to aply to voting also. Only natural born US citizens should vote.

i am inclined to disagree. they pay taxes, they can fight in the military, they are americans, they should be able to vote.

i do feel that only natural born americans should be able to be president though. while it can be argued that some foeigner-born citizens are more loyal that some natural born varieties, i think that percentage may be small. furthermore, i believe it is too big of a risk to open that office to possible foreign subversion.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: Bigdude
I'm all for the law, and I would like it to aply to voting also. Only natural born US citizens should vote.

Oh boy. Then I suppose we should not be required to pay taxes if that came into effect.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: kaizersose

Originally posted by: Bigdude
I'm all for the law, and I would like it to aply to voting also. Only natural born US citizens should vote.

i am inclined to disagree. they pay taxes, they can fight in the military, they are americans, they should be able to vote.

i do feel that only natural born americans should be able to be president though. while it can be argued that some foeigner-born citizens are more loyal that some natural born varieties, i think that percentage may be small. furthermore, i believe it is too big of a risk to open that office to possible foreign subversion.

Agreed except for the only NBA being president. I myself came to this country when I was 3 months old and my loyalty is for this country. Just because someone is born in the US, doesn't make them loyal to America

 

[heartsurgeon]

it is a constitutional requirement that the president be native born..and it is a good idea.
there should never be any questions about a president's loyalty or allegiences.

if not, how would you deal withthis scenario:

a person grows up in country XYZ, serves in their military, and has fought against (and possibly killed) U.S. service men, in the line of duty for their "native" country.

the person later moves to the U.S., becomes a citizen, 40 years later, runs for president and wins..now the "commander-in-chief" of the same army he fought against as a teenager.

certainly possible..

 

[Moonbeam]

Probably the founding fathers had their eyes on the job and wanted to eliminate competition.

 

[kaizersose]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: kaizersose

Originally posted by: Bigdude
I'm all for the law, and I would like it to aply to voting also. Only natural born US citizens should vote.

i am inclined to disagree. they pay taxes, they can fight in the military, they are americans, they should be able to vote.

i do feel that only natural born americans should be able to be president though. while it can be argued that some foeigner-born citizens are more loyal that some natural born varieties, i think that percentage may be small. furthermore, i believe it is too big of a risk to open that office to possible foreign subversion.

Agreed except for the only NBA being president. I myself came to this country when I was 3 months old and my loyalty is for this country. Just because someone is born in the US, doesn't make them loyal to America

my GF and her entire family came here and i have no question where their loyalty lies. the fact remains that their is a greater proabability of a foreign born citizen being used to infilitrate our govt. than a native one.

on a side note, am i a conspiricy theorist?

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: Bigdude
I'm all for the law, and I would like it to aply to voting also. Only natural born US citizens should vote.

I would be willing to bet that a higher percentage of naturalized citizens vote than do native born ones. They likely have a much better idea of just how precious the right to vote is.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
it is a constitutional requirement that the president be native born..and it is a good idea.
there should never be any questions about a president's loyalty or allegiences.

if not, how would you deal withthis scenario:

a person grows up in country XYZ, serves in their military, and has fought against (and possibly killed) U.S. service men, in the line of duty for their "native" country.

the person later moves to the U.S., becomes a citizen, 40 years later, runs for president and wins..now the "commander-in-chief" of the same army he fought against as a teenager.

certainly possible..

Hardly. With the investigations that are done on Presidential candidates, it would certainly be revealed that the candidate at one time fought against and killed Americans, and there would almost definitely be voter reaction to such a revelation.

Nevertheless, I think people are taking extreme examples and making them the justification, ignoring the process of actually becoming President, where such biases would be revealed since the press is not very forgiving with national candidates. No one has addressed the implications of the 14th Amendment, which does not differentiate between the rights of natural born citizens and naturalized citizens, and would appear to grant them equal rights, which is only fitting. Further, no one has also addressed why we should deny the opportunity to become President to someone who happens to be born overseas yet who moves here while still a small child. The experience of being an American is hardly different if someone is born in the States or if they start living there as a 1 year old. Even moreso, no one has addressed the history of the United States as a melting pot of immigrants and how that impacts the consideration. We're denying something to a class of citizens who over the years have made this nation into what it is today.

They can fight and die for our country (and are doing so right now) but never be President. That's equitable?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Original intention was to prevent British or foriegn subversives from gaining the presidency.

The thought of a heavy immigration never entered the minds of the Constitution framers. At that time, immigrants were few and far between; politicians were of the landed gentry