Natural Born Citizen vs Naturalized Citizen vs Non-citizen

The differences between these three groups is significant and has been at the heart of some recent presidential election and illegal immigration issues, so I will pitch in my twenty-five cents worth to attempt setting the record straight. I admit at the outset that those individuals who practice division and confusion - the ones who place their candidate, or party over truth and common sense - will continue throwing up these issues against opposing candidates if there is a chance it will sway public opinion against them. These factious minded persons embody the reason our politics in America resembles more a slugfest than a race. But I digress because I'm not a rambling man... ;o)

Keep in mind these are just my opinions based off of the Constitution and the Rule of Naturalization established in 1790, and 1795. If you haven't yet read these documents then please make a note to do so soon. Don't just settle for my word on the matter.

• Natural born citizen: a person born into citizenship. It doesn't matter if the person is on US, or foreign soil at the time of birth, so long as he/she is born to parents who are US citizens.
• Naturalized citizen: a foreigner who attains citizenship. This one is pretty straightforward as all immigration into the US falls into this group (even individuals granted amnesty).
• Non-citizen: a foreigner who has not attained citizenship. Basically anyone not belonging to one of the first two groups.

Multiple, or dual citizenship is unfortunately used as a political ploy here in the US to confuse the issue of immigration as it pertains to children born on foreign soil to parents who are currently US citizens, children born on US soil to parents who are currently not US citizens, or those born in certain US territories, and is a misnomer because their US citizenship will still be their primary one. For example currently a US citizen can gain second-class citizenship in Canada, but a Canadian cannot gain US citizenship without renouncing his Canadian citizenship (read the Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America for yourself - it's required of anyone mentally fit seeking US citizenship). When a US citizen has dual-citizenship it means his first/primary citizenship is to the US and his second citizenship is to a foreign nation (even if he lives in the foreign nation). Similarly children born to US citizen parents in foreign countries where nationality laws permit may become automatic citizens of that country, but they still inherit US citizenship as their primary. Constitutional law aside, it's common sense when you consider it would be a conflict of interests and disingenuous to swear loyalty to multiple nations simultaneously each with their own self-interests at heart. Let's face it - citizenship with the United States is not unlike entering into a monogamous marriage. ;o)

What about them? They're not US citizens. Plain and simple. Being natural born has nothing to do with being born on the physical soil, or within the physical jurisdiction of the US. Ironically not even Mexico and Canada grant citizenship to children born on their soil to non-citizen parents. If a US citizen sneaked across the Mexican, or Canadian border to have a child (think anchor baby), that child would not become an automatic Mexican/Canadian and the parent would not gain the protection from deportation because he/she has a native born child. So where did this farcical notion emerge from that children born on US soil automatically have, or should have citizenship rights? Personally I think it's the same paradigm that leads some to believe that natural born literally means born on US soil, that also leads to the belief that any child born on US soil means they're an automatic American. To these people it's as if the actual soil itself carries the legislative ability to grant citizenship rights. In this light I suppose it's a testament to the idea that American soil is sacred and perhaps even spiritual, but it's still a belief that spurns out of ignorance to naturalization law. Then again perhaps it's all an orchestrated effort to get naive millennials used to the idea that naturalization laws are old hat - that anyone should be able to become an American by simply stepping foot on its soil. This certainly plays into the whole push for illegal immigration amnesty. If that's the case the inevitable question becomes who's orchestrating the effort?

On that note I believe the record has been officially set straight. So there. :oP