Naturalized president?

[shotupdeer]

Should it be allowed? Part of me says yes as long as you have been a citizen for say 20 years, but then part says no, it should be a position reserved only for americn born citizens. I guess you can call me undecided.

[Bruce Schmeck]

No!

[shotupdeer]

[ QUOTE ]
No!

[/ QUOTE ]Why? Just curous on your reasons.

[TreeStandBowHunter]

NO...NO...NO

You wan't to know why shotupdeer...stick around this time and I'll tell you why later. But in since you brang it up and bring all these other heated topics up, why don't you hang around and fight the fight instead of going in hibernation. http://www.realtree.com/forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif

[slugshooter]

I say no, even if he is naturalized, lived here 30 years and loves this country, he probably loves his native country also and there is too much possibility for a conflict of interest. What happens if his home country attacks us, is he going to have the gumption to wage war with his native country knowing his relatives might die.

[wtnhunt]

Dont think so and will leave it at that.

[OJR]

NO!!!

[ParrotHead]

The answer is NO!

Reason why? This would require a Constitutional Amendment and anytime you allow any government to start messing around with your Constitution then you’re asking for a whole lot of trouble.

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship as the following “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”

Title 8 goes even further in it’s definition:
Anyone born inside the United States
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

My personal feelings are if you can’t find someone qualified to be President out of all of this then we’ve got bigger problems than trying to elect Arnold as our next President.

[huntinsanobsession]

i think that the president should be born in the us because even if they are nuturalized they still have feelings for there native country

[popgun]

I also say NO, but ParrotHead, those qualifications you listed are qualifications to be a citizen of the United States. Not qualifications to be nominated or elected President of the United States. Two completely different topics. .....popgun

[Norm Sauceman]

I am very undecided about it...but I am leaning toward it being a good idea to be allowed.

[Gator]

Nope, don't think it's a good idea at all. Could be cause for to much internal conflict, more that what there is now.

[Mathews XT Man]

NO!!! Because it's unconstitutional! And NO we should not amend it!

[carbonhunter]

[ QUOTE ]
NO!!! Because it's unconstitutional! And NO we should not amend it!

[/ QUOTE ]
this will work .....even though i can think of a few dozen more reasons

[johnf]

No, the reasons the founding fathers made the rule were very clear and still apply today.

[Texan_Til_I_Die]

No from me too. I don't want any possibility of a conflict of allegience (sp?).