Is Obama a "Natural" U.S. Citizen under the U.S. Constitution?

Obama Is a Natural Born US citizen, regarless of place of birth, because his parent's marriage was invalid.

The article seems imply that Obama would be ineligble for the presidency even if he was born in Hawaii. If he was born in U.S. territory to one parent of US citizenship he is automatically considered a natural born citizen by jus soli and jus sanguinis. Even if he was born abroad he would still be a citizen as I will explain.
Unfortunatly Findlaw.com is not the source of US law. In its translation from legalese, the quoute does not mention a very important condition that applies to Obama. The U.S. citizen parent, and the foreign parent Must be married. The actual law pertaining to this issue can be found here:



From the document:
a. Section 301 as Effective on December 24, 1952: When enacted in
1952, section 301 required a U.S. citizen married to an alien to have been
physically present in the United States for ten years, including five
after reaching the age of fourteen, to transmit citizenship to foreign-born
children. The ten-year transmission requirement remained in effect
from 12:01 a.m. EDT December 24, 1952, through midnight November 13,
1986, and still is applicable to persons born during that period.

The problem comes down to the validity of Obama's parent's marriage. When he was 18 Barack Obama Sr. Married a woman named Kezia and had Four children with her. Two of them after returned to Kenya from the United States. He never divorced her her.In the US polygamy is illegal. If you are already married, regardless of where you got married, all subsequent marriages are invalid. This is the case with the marriage of Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. in February 1961. Obama was born out of wedlock. As a child born out of wedlock a different law is applied if he was born outside the United States.

From the same document linked to above:

7 FAM 1133.4-3 Birth Out of Wedlock to American Mother
(TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)
a. Claims Under Section 309(c) INA: A child born abroad out of wedlock
or after December 24, 1952, to a U.S. citizen mother acquires U.S.
citizenship if the mother was physically present continuously for 1
year
the United States or its outlying possessions at any time prior to the
child's birth. This did not change under any of the amendments to
Section 309 INA. Thus a woman who had spent only a very short time
every year outside the United States would be unable to transmit
citizenship under section 309(c) INA even though she might have
qualified to transmit U.S. citizenship under section 301(g) INA if she
had
been married to the father of the child. The 1966 amendment to section
301 INA allowing members of the U.S. armed forces, employees of the
U.S. Government and certain international organizations, and their
dependents to count certain periods outside the United States as U.S.
physical presence does not apply to section 309(c) INA. For this
reason,
the mother of a child born out of wedlock cannot use time spent abroad
as a military dependent, for example, to satisfy all or part of the
requirement of continuous physical presence in the United States for 1
year. Subsequent legitimation or the establishment of a legal
relationship
between an alien father and a person who acquired U.S. citizenship at
birth under section 309(c) does not alter that person's citizenship.


There is no doubt that Stanley Ann Dunham spent more than one continous year inside the united states. Her citizenship was automatically transmited to Obama Upon his birth. He could have been born in Kenya, or in Russia, or on the Moon. It would not matter.

Now you might say that Obama is a citizen, but not a "Natural Born Citizen" as required by the U.S. Constitution. The use of Natural born citizen does not just apply to jus soli, it applies to jus sanguinis as well.
Do you understand why? What if a woman goes on a trip to Kenya, Russia or the Moon while she's 7 months pregnant? She doesn't plan to give birth outside of the US but nature doesnt follow everyones schedules. She's back in the US two days later with the baby.
A similar situation occured with Mitt Romney's dead father. George Romney was born in Mexico in 1907. He did not move to the United States until his family fled from the Mexican revolution in 1910. Yet in 1968 George Romney ran for president. There's precedence here. George Romney was eligible to run because he inherited his citizenship through jus sanguinis.
It works in a similar fashion for John McCain. John McCain was born at Coco Solo U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone. But if a panamanian mother had given birth in the room next door on the same day, that child would not be a U.S. Citizen.
Current State Department policy reads:
"Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth."
Do you get it? John McCain is a citizen not because he was born on a Military Base, but because his parents were American. Jus Sanguinis. if Obama was born overseas it would be the same for him.

Got it???

Unfortunately, my guess is going to be no...  When will these stupid and baseless rumors end?  Seriously?  It was old months ago.  It's old now.  Didn't gain traction then.  Won't gain traction now. 

Consiracy theories represent a known glitch in Human reasoning.

I smell a rat and methinks he's in the Whitehouse!

What does Creationism got to do with Conspiracy theory? Tried to throw that one in,did you?
Closed minds never solve anything

. . . . . .

*puts hands together*

Dear God? Are you there?

*Yes my child?*

...I would like to file a bug report.