View Single Post
      06-02-2011, 11:21 PM   #46
Brigadier General
scottwww's Avatar

Drives: 07 BMW 335i Cpe, 05 Mazda RX8
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Send a message via MSN to scottwww
Originally Posted by 11Series View Post
If I provide a scan of the original text as the Founding Fathers would have read it, will you concede that Vattel wasn't the source of the phrase Natural Born Citizen, and as such, Vattel's statements cannot be the glossary definition of the phrase?
Originally Posted by scottwww View Post
It would be quite welcome to see the scanned pages. Then comparison can be made. As to the source of the exact word "natural born Citizen" you may be able demonstrate that translation was not the source. If in that translation it does not use the words "natural born citizen" as it was found in the images I was able to share, then I would certainly be able to concede that that translation did not contain that translation on those pages. It would lend reasonable support to your argument.
Originally Posted by 11Series View Post
I'm going to go out on a limb here, and take you at your word. Try not to let me down... again. Here are scans of the original texts using the phrase "natives or indegenes" which is the direct translation of “Les Naturels ou indegenes”, which is the phrase that Vattel used in his original French writings.

The first is Vattel London 1760, the second is Vattel 1787 American Edition.
Originally Posted by scottwww View Post
Thank you very much for posting support for your argument. And I do concede that these two scans you presented do not use the words "natural born citizen" as do other translations.

Now, will you concede without further evidence that Vattel is a highly regarded authority on citizenship and that the founding fathers were well aware of his writings, respected his writings, and referred to them in crafting legislation and the founding documents?

And what do you have to present to establish how the founders understood the words "natural born Citizen" which they prominently included in three requirements for qualification to be President? As it was adopted without debate, certainly it was understood by all. Support your conclusions with evidence.
Originally Posted by 11Series View Post
I knew I could trust you to weasel out of your promise.

Vattel was NOT used regarding citizenship. I just proved that, and you just weaseled out of your promise.

You are dishonest and a liar.
How so? Now you are expeting promises? I conceded what I affirmed I would concede. And I believe I did so very tactfully. And here you call me a liar. The only reason I agreed to concede anything without reason was simply so that there could be a discussion based on evidence. I appreciate your evidence and accept it for what it is. And as one piece of evidence, it is one piece of the puzzle. For you to expect otherwise is your problem. If you think discussion ends with one good bid of information, you are very wrong.

So, in regard to Vattel, how did the founders view Law of Nations? Was it viewed with contempt? Was it unknown to them? Was it used by them in crafting American documents? Did they use Law of Nations in debate? Did they implement aspects of Law of Nations in statute? You would like to dismiss Vattel, but history did not. You stand alone.