Re: why birtherism might not matter, even if it's true ...

Here's one theory I've just come across:

Obama's father was already married to a woman in Kenya when he "married" 
Obama's pregnant teenaged mother.

The United States does not recognize polygamous marriages.

Ergo, Obama's parents were never legally married.

***eh, that depends on whether his dad's marriage in Kenya was a legally
recognized marriage.  We are now sinking to legal definitions.


Ergo, if Obama's mother gave birth to him overseas, she would be his only
legally recognized parent and, therefore, he would be considered a
natural-born American citizen just like the children of legally married
American citizens who happen to be overseas when they give birth.

***he would actually have dual citizenship in that case, and that may or may
not be a legal complication.  (there are many conditions, the least of which
is which country and such)   But if that was true, she should have requested
a Consular Report of Birth Abroad.  But regardless, legal precedents give
children of US citizens born abroad full US citizenship.

***McCain has already had that vetted by the way.


Putting Obama's Kenyan father's name on the birth certificate would make
Obama *not* a natural-born American citizen *only if* his father's
"marriage" to his mother were legally valid.  But it isn't.

Ergo, *it doesn't matter* where Obama was born.

So ... American legal experts ... does that make sense? 

**in a sense it does.  Not that it will stop the birthers.


-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot