Thread: Let's Recap....

  1. #76
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScareCrow57 View Post
    Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:

    1. obtaining naturalization in a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (1) INA);
    2. taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);
    3. entering or serving in the armed forces of a foreign state engaged in hostilities against the U.S. or serving as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer in the armed forces of a foreign state (Sec. 349 (a) (3) INA);
    4. accepting employment with a foreign government if (a) one has the nationality of that foreign state or (b) an oath or declaration of allegiance is required in accepting the position (Sec. 349 (a) (4) INA);
    5. formally renouncing U.S. citizenship before a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer outside the United States (sec. 349 (a) (5) INA);
    6. formally renouncing U.S. citizenship within the U.S. (but only under strict, narrow statutory conditions) (Sec. 349 (a) (6) INA);
    7. conviction for an act of treason (Sec. 349 (a) (7) INA).

    As the legal Guardian the father can do these things. I don't see anything about a 6 year old cannot lose their citizenship.
    Gotta love incomplete research....

    I present the United States Department of State Guide for the Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship

    And I quote from the fine folks at the Department of State:

    F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN

    Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
    Also a little piece of a gem that can be found in Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481)

    Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence.
    Since his parents took him out of the country in 1967, it is not up to anyone to prove that Obama didn't renounce his citizenship. Its up to the anti-Obama crowd to prove that he did.
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  2. #77
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idiotboy
    Your talking out your butt again. You cannot find the ,law that says that because it doesn't exist yet.
    Hey idiotboy. Maybe your crayon college can prove a negative. Something that is unattainable in the real world.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  3. #78
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarcusKspn View Post
    Gotta love incomplete research....
    His research of his credit card agreements should tell you all one needs to know about his thoroughness.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  4. #79
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarcusKspn View Post
    Gotta love incomplete research....

    I present the United States Department of State Guide for the Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship

    And I quote from the fine folks at the Department of State:

    F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN



    Also a little piece of a gem that can be found in Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481)



    Since his parents took him out of the country in 1967, it is not up to anyone to prove that Obama didn't renounce his citizenship. Its up to the anti-Obama crowd to prove that he did.
    Well thank you for an excellent post with sources. I'm not used to that coming from the liberal house. Personally, I'm not a legal expert and I didn't bring it up.
    I also found this
    Parents cannot renounce United States citizenship on behalf of their children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5), persons under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that they fully understand the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation and are voluntarily seeking to renounce their citizenship. United States common law establishes an arbitrary limit of age fourteen under which a child's understanding must be established by substantial evidence.

    Under Section 351(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act [8 U.S.C. 1483(b)], a person who renounced U.S. citizenship before the age of eighteen years and "who within six months after attaining the age of eighteen years asserts his claim to United States nationality in such manner as the Secretary of State shall by regulation prescribe, shall not be deemed to have expatriated himself...." The relevant regulation is Section 50.20(b) of Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations which requires that the person take an oath of allegiance to the United States before a diplomatic or consular officer in order to retain U.S. citizenship.
    I personally have never questioned that he is qualified to be president. I'm certain that there are a number of people who have checked and verified everything, both republicans and democrats. If there was anything of substance we would have known well before the election.

    That said, he does go against many of the founding and guiding principles of this country. The most basic right was that of freedom from government intervention. Our fore fathers recognized the need for a set of rules and that a governing body was needed to help the people coexist. Unfortunately, our government has gone form one of let the people be free to one of the government will tell you what to do. Sometime back in the late 1800s the snowball of governmental interference was started. And as it has rolled downhill it has gained in size and momentum. Our leaders need to get back to the basics. They need to take this country back to its free, entrepreneurial, self it once was. This country's basic foundations are of a free enterprise and a free people. I say if one doesn't like the foundations and basic principles of this country then they shouldn't be here. It's just like I detest groups like PETA, the rainbow coalition, KKK, NAACP, Sierra Club, GreenPeace etc. So I am not part of those groups and I don't try to change them. If you don't like the basic principles of America then find a place that subscribes to your principles.

    Again, I look forward to more intelligent post like this. Thank you.
    Last edited by ScareCrow57; 05-05-2009 at 06:29 AM.

  5. #80
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idiotboy
    That said, he does go against many of the founding and guiding principles of this country. The most basic right was that of freedom from government intervention. Our fore fathers recognized the need for a set of rules and that a governing body was needed to help the people coexist. Unfortunately, our government has gone form one of let the people be free to one of the government will tell you what to do. Sometime back in the late 1800s the snowball of governmental interference was started. And as it has rolled downhill it has gained in size and momentum. Our leaders need to get back to the basics. They need to take this country back to its free, entrepreneurial, self it once was. This country's basic foundations are of a free enterprise and a free people.
    Hey idiotboy. You might want to do more thorough research on the Founding Fathers. Even they didn't govern according to those principles.

    Quote Originally Posted by idiotboy
    Again, I look forward to more intelligent post like this. Thank you.
    Why? It's not like you'll understand.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register