Hip, hip hooray for birthers
The term birther was invented by partisans of the Obama administration and repeated by the news media to deny the claims that Barack Obama was not natural born, and thus not eligible to be President. Its effect was to disparage the political rights of America's natural born Citizens, which ironically describe most people in the media and American governments. Thus, in their religious fervor on behalf of a false President, anti-birthers were actually disparaging their own natural rights as natural born Citizens. I generally love political irony, but not this kind which has suspended the U.S. constitution.
So, the campaign against birthers was an anti-natural born Citizen campaign. It was based either 1) on the Obama administration's (and nearly every Americans') misunderstanding of citizenship law (and on other religious, non-scientific and illogical beliefs about government and law), or 2) on the Obama administration's deliberate attempt to blur the distinctions between natural and artificial citizens, in violation of the U.S. constitution.
In either case, the strength of messianic propaganda was demonstrated when it caused Congress to install a false "President" and when it got natural citizens to call themselves false and hateful names, such as birther.
The intended slander of denigrating natural born Citizens takes many forms. You are stupid to spend your time trying to secure your citizenship rights, say some. You are white because only white people claim privileges that don't belong to others. You are a racist because you hate black men and you've never liked America's first black President. And in my particular case, which argues that the natural source of U.S. citizens is U.S. citizen fathers, the slanderers say that you (that would be me) are a neanderthal sexist who should pull his head out of his ass. (That's okay. I can take it.)
All of these birther accusations share one particularly heinous motivation: to deny the rights of citizenship to a class of people, just as the institution of slavery did a class of people. Thus, its motivation is the same as that behind “nigger.” It is an attempt to deny people their rights, including their dignity.
In the case of natural born Citizens, including black natural born Citizens, use of birther is to deny them the natural right to be the exclusive pool from which Presidents are chosen. In the case of their citizen fathers, it is to deny them the natural right to be the sole source of U.S. Presidents. This is a violation of the natural rights of male and female natural born Citizens, and an emasculation of the natural rights of their fathers. This is no different than calling people names so as to deny them the right to vote or to own property or to marry who they love. But worse, this practice is to emasculate the rights of the nation's primary and natural citizens.
Anyone who can read and comprehend the short essays that I have written on natural born Citizen-status at this website knows that the above accusations and innuendos (against at least me as a birther) are patently false. In fact because most Americans in America (including black Americans) are natural born Citizens (because they have citizen fathers), then standing up for one's citizenship rights HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE OR GENDER AT ALL. It is pan-racial and pan-gender.
One's right to run for President is both color- and gender-blind. It is also blind to one's mother and one's place of birth. However, it is not blind to the nationality of one's father.
Because of the false understanding of citizenship law, white birthers have been disparaged as racists when they in fact have been the only Americans standing up for the rights of black Americans. In particular, in my case, I am standing up for the rights of black American men to pass natural born Citizenship onto their offspring. That is also what the 14th Amendment did in 1865. There weren't cries against birthers then.
As all my essays show, I am standing up for the republican form of government that secures a jurisdiction that is separate from positive law, where Congress cannot dictate citizenship rights to whites or blacks and males or females, as a monarch can the “rights” of its citizen-subjects.
So, no one is the victim of any racism on my birther part. Black Americans who understand and stand up for their citizenship rights, as I do their rights, are Jesus Christs in my book. They are wise and strong in advocacy about their natural political rights which are not based on man-made law. They are entitled to equal rights under God, not man. Man's written law in a republic, called positive law, serves only to secure these God-given equal rights.
The only issue in the birther debate is who or what conveys citizenship. There are only 3 possible criteria for US citizenship: mothers, fathers and soil. I am from the camp that U.S. fathers convey natural citizenship by marriage or legitimation, and that in the alternative, in the absence of a U.S. father, Congress conveys naturalized citizenship based on one's mother or place of birth.
The other two arguments, based on U.S. mothers or U.S. soil jurisdiction, fail in statutory and constitutional support, as well as in logic and reason. They both allow the republican form of government to become monarchical, by allowing the installation of a foreign monarch as President, which is antithetical to the U.S. constitution.
Father-created natural citizens are called natural born Citizens. Congress' naturalized, artificial citizens are called Citizens of the United States. The reason for this arrangement is explained here.
Thus, because birthers are seeking to secure the rights of all natural born Citizens, including all black natural born Citizens, then to be a birther is like being a Martin Luther King Jr. who sought equal rights for black Americans. Whereas most black Americans are descendants of 14th Amendment citizens, it is historically significant that America's first black “President” is not. He is a descendant of men and women who never suffered the effects of American slavery. Thus, the irony of his not having a U.S. citizen father is more than symbolic. The effects are real.
In conclusion, all black and white natural born Citizens -- males and females alike -- have equal political rights to run for President and Vice President. All (naturalized) Citizens of the United States have equal political rights also, but they are not quite equal to those of natural born Citizens. The only substantive difference is that natural born Citizens, who are born to U.S. citizen fathers, may serve as President and Vice President. This is because artificial citizens, who are foreign by Nature and by the political nature of their foreign fathers, cannot naturally represent natural citizens within a republican form of government.
So hooray for birthers. Whether they understand the legal issue or not, they know something is rotten in Washington and on the campaign trail, where the U.S. constitution has been suspended. Because of their foreign fathers, Barack Obama, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are Citizens of the United States and are not natural born Citizens. When Congress bestowed at birth their legal privilege of naturalized citizenship, based on their mothers' U.S. nationality or based on their births on U.S. soil, this privilege did not include a natural right to run for U.S. President, which comes only from U.S. citizen fathers.
So, the campaign against birthers was an anti-natural born Citizen campaign. It was based either 1) on the Obama administration's (and nearly every Americans') misunderstanding of citizenship law (and on other religious, non-scientific and illogical beliefs about government and law), or 2) on the Obama administration's deliberate attempt to blur the distinctions between natural and artificial citizens, in violation of the U.S. constitution.
In either case, the strength of messianic propaganda was demonstrated when it caused Congress to install a false "President" and when it got natural citizens to call themselves false and hateful names, such as birther.
The intended slander of denigrating natural born Citizens takes many forms. You are stupid to spend your time trying to secure your citizenship rights, say some. You are white because only white people claim privileges that don't belong to others. You are a racist because you hate black men and you've never liked America's first black President. And in my particular case, which argues that the natural source of U.S. citizens is U.S. citizen fathers, the slanderers say that you (that would be me) are a neanderthal sexist who should pull his head out of his ass. (That's okay. I can take it.)
All of these birther accusations share one particularly heinous motivation: to deny the rights of citizenship to a class of people, just as the institution of slavery did a class of people. Thus, its motivation is the same as that behind “nigger.” It is an attempt to deny people their rights, including their dignity.
In the case of natural born Citizens, including black natural born Citizens, use of birther is to deny them the natural right to be the exclusive pool from which Presidents are chosen. In the case of their citizen fathers, it is to deny them the natural right to be the sole source of U.S. Presidents. This is a violation of the natural rights of male and female natural born Citizens, and an emasculation of the natural rights of their fathers. This is no different than calling people names so as to deny them the right to vote or to own property or to marry who they love. But worse, this practice is to emasculate the rights of the nation's primary and natural citizens.
Anyone who can read and comprehend the short essays that I have written on natural born Citizen-status at this website knows that the above accusations and innuendos (against at least me as a birther) are patently false. In fact because most Americans in America (including black Americans) are natural born Citizens (because they have citizen fathers), then standing up for one's citizenship rights HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE OR GENDER AT ALL. It is pan-racial and pan-gender.
One's right to run for President is both color- and gender-blind. It is also blind to one's mother and one's place of birth. However, it is not blind to the nationality of one's father.
Because of the false understanding of citizenship law, white birthers have been disparaged as racists when they in fact have been the only Americans standing up for the rights of black Americans. In particular, in my case, I am standing up for the rights of black American men to pass natural born Citizenship onto their offspring. That is also what the 14th Amendment did in 1865. There weren't cries against birthers then.
As all my essays show, I am standing up for the republican form of government that secures a jurisdiction that is separate from positive law, where Congress cannot dictate citizenship rights to whites or blacks and males or females, as a monarch can the “rights” of its citizen-subjects.
So, no one is the victim of any racism on my birther part. Black Americans who understand and stand up for their citizenship rights, as I do their rights, are Jesus Christs in my book. They are wise and strong in advocacy about their natural political rights which are not based on man-made law. They are entitled to equal rights under God, not man. Man's written law in a republic, called positive law, serves only to secure these God-given equal rights.
The only issue in the birther debate is who or what conveys citizenship. There are only 3 possible criteria for US citizenship: mothers, fathers and soil. I am from the camp that U.S. fathers convey natural citizenship by marriage or legitimation, and that in the alternative, in the absence of a U.S. father, Congress conveys naturalized citizenship based on one's mother or place of birth.
The other two arguments, based on U.S. mothers or U.S. soil jurisdiction, fail in statutory and constitutional support, as well as in logic and reason. They both allow the republican form of government to become monarchical, by allowing the installation of a foreign monarch as President, which is antithetical to the U.S. constitution.
Father-created natural citizens are called natural born Citizens. Congress' naturalized, artificial citizens are called Citizens of the United States. The reason for this arrangement is explained here.
Thus, because birthers are seeking to secure the rights of all natural born Citizens, including all black natural born Citizens, then to be a birther is like being a Martin Luther King Jr. who sought equal rights for black Americans. Whereas most black Americans are descendants of 14th Amendment citizens, it is historically significant that America's first black “President” is not. He is a descendant of men and women who never suffered the effects of American slavery. Thus, the irony of his not having a U.S. citizen father is more than symbolic. The effects are real.
In conclusion, all black and white natural born Citizens -- males and females alike -- have equal political rights to run for President and Vice President. All (naturalized) Citizens of the United States have equal political rights also, but they are not quite equal to those of natural born Citizens. The only substantive difference is that natural born Citizens, who are born to U.S. citizen fathers, may serve as President and Vice President. This is because artificial citizens, who are foreign by Nature and by the political nature of their foreign fathers, cannot naturally represent natural citizens within a republican form of government.
So hooray for birthers. Whether they understand the legal issue or not, they know something is rotten in Washington and on the campaign trail, where the U.S. constitution has been suspended. Because of their foreign fathers, Barack Obama, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio are Citizens of the United States and are not natural born Citizens. When Congress bestowed at birth their legal privilege of naturalized citizenship, based on their mothers' U.S. nationality or based on their births on U.S. soil, this privilege did not include a natural right to run for U.S. President, which comes only from U.S. citizen fathers.