Vattel Birthers – The New “Loop Gurus” ???

The Vattel Pack Traveled to France Searching For Emerich, The Alpha Male

The Loop Guru Poem

Even a man who is pure of heart
In matters pedagogic,
Will pull out his hair,
Gnash his teeth, and Swear!
At Vattle Birther logic.

Well, it’s not long until Halloween, and most everybody knows that a Loup Garou is the French term for a werewolf.  But I already put up one “wolf” image today, sooo I did the Eiffel Tower in France, instead.  The term Loop Guru, in my title is about a different kind of fiend,  one who goes around butchering the law and murdering logic and reason.  A Loop is something that just keeps circling around and around,  and doing the same thing over and over, and that is how the Vattle Birthers ( which is my sarcastic term for the Vattel Birthers) argue their legal theories. In circles,  and no matter how much you prove the wrong at each and every point, they just keep going to the point like nothing happened. Which I am going to give you an example of shortly.

And  Guru,  is a word for a teacher, but it is also what people call the pretend lawyers who go around misinforming people about stuff like income taxes being illegal and people not having to pay them. Which is TOTALLY wrong and just gets a lot of people in trouble. Plus these gurus peddle a whole lot of other Idiot Legal Arguments, which you can find out about in the Pseudo-Lawyer and other Internet Articles here.  Trust me,  I will be writing a whole more about this topic!!!

Sooo, here is the example I promised you. I have debated a lot of Vattle Birthers on the Internet, and watched others do it, too, and I assure you this is representative, and actually on the mild side of Vattle Birther logical mayhem:

Vattle Birther: There is a difference between 14th Amendment citizens and natural born citizens. Obama may be a 14th Amendment Citizen, but he is not a natural born citizen like it requires in the Constitution to be President, because he does not have two citizen parents.

Rational Person:  There is no difference.  All the 14th Amendment requires is birth within the United States, while under its jurisdiction to be citizen, which is the same thing the old term natural born citizen meant. The citizenship of the parents does not matter.

Vattle Birther: OH NOES!!! A natural born citizen is supposed to be defined by common law, not the 14th Amendment.!!!

Rational Person: Oh, whatever if it will shut you up. OK, here is what the common law says, from an 1888 case, which is quoted in the Wong Kim Ark case in 1898:

In United States v. Rhodes (1866), Mr. Justice Swayne, sitting in the Circuit Court, said:

All persons born in the allegiance of the King are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. . . . We find no warrant for the opinion [p663] that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution. (1 Abbott (U.S.) 28, 40, 41.)

See, it’s the same thing. So now, will you STFU???

Vattle Birther: OH NO! Allegiance means having two citizen parents!!! Like Emerich de Vattel said.

Rational Person:  No it doesn’t. Here is what the Wong Kim Ark judges said allegiance was, which was just being there inside the country:

It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance [ ] and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject [exceptions omitted].

III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.13

Now just what is sooo hard to understand about this. If we do it the right way, through the 14th Amendment, or your stupid way through common law, the result  is the same. Either way you do it, 14th Amendment or common law, you end up in the same place. Which is no surprise to rational people who understand the 14th Amendment put the common law on this issue into the Constitution.  Plus, Vattel is not quoted anywhere in common law or the Constitution for the purposes of determining who is a natural born citizen.

Vattle Birther: But, but, but. . . I don’t like that Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case in 1898. I want to go back in time 24 years to 1874, where the Minor vs. Happersett judges said that ONLY people born in the country  to two citizen parents were natural born citizens.

Rational Person: That case didn’t say that.  Here is what it said:

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.

See, those judges left the issue open. You must have forgot the part I bolded, huh??? Use your head for a minute. What are the possibilities of kinds of people born in America??? Huh??? Isn’t it this:

a)   People born in America to 2 citizen parents;
b)   People born in America to 2 alien parents;
c)   People born in America to 1 citizen parent and 1 alien parent.

All the Minor judges said was that people in (a) were natural born citizens.  The Minor judges said they didn’t need to decide about the people in (b) and (c).  Then, the Wong Kim Ark case 24 years later made sure everybody understood (b) and (c) were in when a Chinese guy was born here to two alien parents and they said he was a citizen by virtue of his birth here.

Vattle Birther: There is a difference between 14th Amendment citizens and natural born citizens. Wong Kim Ark may be a 14th Amendment Citizen, but he is not a natural born citizen like it requires in the Constitution to be President, because he does not have two citizen parents.

Rational Person:  Pulling out hair. Gnashing teeth. Aargh! *%&*!!!*@!!!

Trust me, this is what you go through!!!

Aargh! *%&*!!!*@!!!

Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter


About Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

Hi!!! I am a Girl Reporter on the Internet. I am 34. Plus I am a INTP. I have a Major in Human Kinetics, and a Minor in English. I have 2 cats, and a new kitten! I write poetry, and plus I am trying to learn how to play guitar. I think that is all??? Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter View all posts by Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: