There’s a lot of debate these days about whether Senator Ted Cruz is eligible to run for the office of President of the United States because he was born in Canada to a Cuban dad with Canadian citizenship.

No one is arguing that Cruz’ mom is a U.S. citizen and that her son was at the very least a dual citizen by statute.

Cruz is a citizen of the United States.  No doubt.

However, the framers of the Constitution were not satisfied that the President of the nation be a citizen.  They raised the bar by demanding  the following in (Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5):

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

Most people are willing to let Cruz slide because he had Canadian citizenship, and, after all, isn’t Canada just like the U.S.?  They look like us for the most part, mostly speak the same language, and are pretty friendly.

Let’s look at this from another perspective and insert a different country and see if Cruz’ argument holds up to further scrutiny.

What if Cruz’ Cuban dad had married his U.S. citizen mom and moved to, say, Iran? And what if his Cuban dad had been granted Iranian citizenship? And what if Ted had been born in Tehran, and was an Iranian citizen, been educated in Iranian schools all of his life, went to an Iranian university, identified as a Muslim, studied under an imam, and generally considered Iran his home.

Would the fact that his mom was a U.S. citizen still be adequate to fulfill the requirement of “Natural Born Citizen” in your mind?

Would this be someone we would want to hold the office of President? Isn’t the intent of the founders to keep someone with a foreign allegiance out of this office?

Isn’t that why the Constitutional requirement does NOT JUST READ “citizen of the U.S.” but “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN”?

If someone has “dual citizenship” is that not a potential for “dual loyalty” and exactly what the framers of the Constitution wished to avoid?

Cruz’ mom being a U.S. citizen grants him citizenship rights by legal statute, but the founders demanded more than “naturalization.” They did not want someone with foreign allegiances who became a U.S. citizen to be able to hold this high office.

I think the intent is clear and the reasoning sound.

People are willing to overlook Cruz’ miasma because he’s from Canada.  However, Ted Cruz should not be allowed to run for President. If Cruz REALLY had integrity and respect for the Constitution he would recognize this and step down.

Even if Cruz ultimately wins the argument, he will do irreparable harm by opening the door for our next President to have Iranian, or Albanian, or German, or Ugandan loyalties.

This is a link to an excellent article that outlines the entire debate and looks deeply into the question with letters and quotes that show the intent of the founders.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2840767/posts

Reprinted from the Book:

My Two Cents:  On Politics, Religion, Sex, And All The Other
Things We’re Not Supposed To Talk About At Thanksgiving Dinner

(A Compendium Of Observations And Common Sense Solutions To The
Issues Threatening The Survival Of America)

 by Patrick A. Taylor
Copyright 2005-2016, by Patrick A. Taylor
All Rights Reserved

Get an inexpensive subscription for top quality opinion content for your own publication delivered to your inbox weekly.
Contact author for details.

Christian.  Conservative.  Constitutional.