Kamala Harris Is Not Eligible to Be Vice-President of the United States

[Bobby Jo]

Umm...I don't see any...any...direct reference to the United States in Scripture; really I don't.

Most people don't see what they're not looking for. Have you tried looking?

Bobby Jo

 

[farouk]

Most people don't see what they're not looking for. Have you tried looking?

Bobby Jo

So: what happened between the Apostles and the Apostles' doctrine (Acts 2.42) and the year 1776; was Apostolic authority supposedly revived in 1776?

I'm confused...

 

[bukka]

Does Psalm 109 really mention President Obama?

Umm...I don't see any...any...direct reference to the United States in Scripture; really I don't.

I see the same farouk. I don't see any direct reference to the United States in scripture. I think that this is a vanity on the part of some Americans.

 

[farouk]

I see the same farouk. I don't see any direct reference to the United States in scripture. I think that this is a vanity on the part of some Americans.

@bukka Decades back there was a prophetic paperback issued with a cover showing a missile with a hammer and sickle falling on a map of Israel. The hammer and sickle represented the Soviet Union. Where is the Soviet Union today? Where is the prophecy which insinuated that specifically Soviet missiles would fall on Israel?

It's called newspaper exegesis, or CNN rolling commentary, or something....

The song says:

"Wonderful things in the Bible I see,
Especially what's put there by you and by me."

 

[farouk]

Most people don't see what they're not looking for. Have you tried looking?

Bobby Jo

If ppl want to see the United States in the Bible and want it strongly enough, they will likely "see" it.

It's called eisegesis (putting meaning into the text), rather than exegesis (getting the meaning that's actually there from the text).

 

[Bobby Jo]

If ppl want to see the United States in the Bible and want it strongly enough, they will likely "see" it.
...

... and if they deny something in the Bible, and refuse it strongly enough, they will likely deny it. So are you asking, or denying?

Bobby Jo

 

[farouk]

... and if they deny something in the Bible, and refuse it strongly enough, they will likely deny it. So are you asking, or denying?

Bobby Jo

The onus is on demonstrating that the Bible supposedly does refer to the United States; argument from silence gets nowhere.

 

[Bobby Jo]

The onus is on demonstrating that the Bible supposedly does refer to the United States; argument from silence gets nowhere.

I have no problem defining and defending what I've already stipulated. But the question is: Will you stop your ears, or will you be an honest arbiter?

Bobby Jo

 

[Giuliano]

You, my dear "friend" are IGNORANT. And as the saying goes: Ignorance can be cured, but stupidity is forever.

Bobby Jo

Ah, yes, you are the clever one. . . according to you.

Isaiah 5:21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!

 

[Giuliano]

As nasty as Republicans have gotten over Obama and Harris not being citizens, perhaps someone should suggest reopening Melania's case. It seems almost certain she lied and committed visa fraud. Should she be stripped of her citizenship and deported back to Slovenia? The story she told the press has gaping holes in it. She said she first came to the US in 1996, but one of her nude photo shoots in the US is from 1995. It looks as if she said she was here to travel and not work, then did the photo shoot when she wasn't supposed to be working.

No, I'm not advocating deporting Melania. I wouldn't want to put her in a position where she might be separated from Barron, and I wouldn't want to force him to leave the US if he wanted to be with her. I'd rather forget it even if she did break the law long ago. She has too much family here now to make a fuss about it.

 

[kcnalp]

Since when does Uncle Sam care about the US Constitution? They do what they want to do.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

@bukka You persist in calling Trump an "anti-christ."

Perhaps you would like to answer the following questions:

Which American president changed the White House Christmas cards from being about Christmas or faith to cards featuring the family dogs and similar non-Christmas related subjects?

Which president decorated the White House Christmas tree with ornaments that included figures such as Mao Zedong and a drag queen?

Which president excluded pro-life groups from attending a White House-sponsored healthcare summit?

Which president nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican?

Which president speaking at Georgetown University ordered a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name covered while he was delivering his speech?

Which president made a practice of deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence?

Which president opposed the inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial?

Which presidential administration announced that it would forgive student loans in exchange for public service, but that it would no longer forgive student loans if the public service was related to religion?
​

I'll give you three guesses, and the first two don't count....

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Give up, Bukka?

Answer:

The answer of course is President Barack Obama, the most extreme leftwing figure ever to occupy the White House. Obama’s attacks on Christians earned him the title of “America’s Most Biblically Hostile President” from the website Wallbuilders, which listed these incidents.

Of course these constitute only a partial list of Obama’s attacks on Christians, and religious communities in general.

Among Obama’s more serious crimes was his support for the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which gave a green light to that infidel-hating organization to murder thousands of Coptic Christians simply because they were Christian.

Even worse, Obama abandoned America’s military base in Iraq and withdrew America’s troops, creating a vacuum which gave rise to ISIS and the creation of the Islamic state.

The jihadists then set out to murder hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Christians without a protest from Obama or a serious military effort to stop them.

Thanks to Obama’s reluctance, ISIS succeeded in destroying the oldest Christian community in the world whose temple in Mosul had held Sunday sermons continuously since the time of St. Paul.

This genocide was one of the most disgraceful episodes in American history.

And it was the direct responsibility of a president who went to the United Nations after the attack in Benghazi to protect the Islamic jihadists responsible for the murder of four Americans — including the American ambassador.

Although he knew the claim was false, Obama blamed their deaths on an obscure filmmaker whose offensive video no one saw. Obama then proclaimed to the world in the strangest words ever uttered by an American president: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet Mohammed.”

The blood on Obama’s hands was more than a betrayal of the Iraqi Christians and the heroes in Benghazi.

It was a betrayal of every American and every Iraqi who gave their lives to keep that country out of the hands of the terrorists.

It was a betrayal of America itself.

David Horowitz, CEO of the David Horowitz Center in Los Angeles. He is the author of the bestseller “Dark Agenda: The War to Destroy Christian America.”

Source: Why Obama Was Most Anti-Christian President​

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Concerning the OP, some of you might be interested to know where Kamala Harris stands on important issues. I created a threat addressing this topic.

Kamala Harris on the Issues

 

[Yehren]

FALSE.

Bobby Jo

Fortunately, you don't get to decide. People who have spent a lifetime studying the Constitution, have shown that it's true. It's the law of the land and the decision verifying the Constitution has was over a hundred years ago. Find a way to live with it, and move on.

 

[Marymog]

Senator Kamala Harris is not, from a constitutional standpoint, a natural-born citizen of the United States. She was born on American soil, but that’s not enough to qualify for birthright citizenship. Here is the actual language of the 14th Amendment (emphasis mine throughout):“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” It’s not enough just to be born on U.S. soil. You must both be born on U.S. soil and be subject “to the jurisdiction thereof” when it happens.

It’s not even enough that one’s parents be legally present in the U.S. at the time of the child’s birth. The issue is to whom do the parents - and therefore the child - owe their ultimate allegiance. So while they may temporarily be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S., their ultimate allegiance, the ultimate jurisdiction to which they are subject, belongs to the nation of their birth, the land where they possess citizenship and from whence they came.

Kamala Harris Is Not Eligible to Be Vice-President of the United States

Hmmm....I read that she was born in California

 

[Nancy]

Hmmm....I read that she was born in California

Oakland Ca. to be precise.

 

[BreadOfLife]

View attachment 10301

And I don't think that anybody who considers themselves to be a Christian should judge that a person cannot be redeemed in Christ.
Your hypocrisy is OUT of control.

Good luck with that on Judgement Day . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

You guys were constantly in a rage because in his campaign, he always downplayed his race. C'mon. Do you think everyone forgot?
Yep. The racists were chewing carpet because he didn't play up race.
Obama played down his race. It was a smart move. That way, the racists had to initiate the race card each time they tried it.
That’s a completely dishonest statement and most Americans know it.

President Donald Trump is doubling down on a strategy he believes worked to his advantage four years ago: seizing on divisive culture wars and using race-baiting rhetoric as he seeks to fire up his base to give him a second term in office. His GOP allies on Capitol Hill are looking on with alarm.
Uncertain how to respond to a President who has long favored incendiary remarks and targets any Republican who shows even the slightest signs of disloyalty, many in his party are aghast as Trump's poll numbers plummet and large numbers of Americans disapprove of his handling of the twin crises that have dominated this election year.
As Trump's polls sink amid divisive racial rhetoric, GOP is aghast - CNNPolitics

His own party leaders realize it:

"He's a race-baiting, xenophobic religious bigot."
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham

Compare Trump's racist bilge with this from Obama:

“I don’t believe it is possible to transcend race in this country. Race is a factor in this society. The legacy of Jim Crow and slavery has not gone away. It is not an accident that African-Americans experience high crime rates, are poor, and have less wealth. It is a direct result of our racial history.” — Barack Obama

All quite true. As most Americans realize. And they know that Trump's racist behavior has made things worse:

Americans Say President Trump Has Worsened Race Relations Since George Floyd's Death
A majority of Americans feels that President Trump has made race relations worse since George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police. That's according to a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll taken this week after demonstrations spread around the country.
...
two-thirds of Americans think Trump has increased racial tensions in this country after George Floyd's death. And Trump is suffering politically because of it. His job approval rating is at 41%. It's down a couple points since March, but about where it's been. But his disapproval rating, the number of people disapproving of the job he's doing, is at 55%, almost the worst of his presidency.

And what's striking about this is the intensity of that disapproval. Almost half the country, 47%, now say they strongly disapprove of the job the president is doing. Independents strongly disapproving have shot up 10 points since March. And all that's put Trump in a big hole against Joe Biden. Biden leads Trump in a head-to-head in the general election now 50 to 43. And the poll shows Biden making inroads with key groups, like independents, whites, women and people who live in the suburbs in particular.
Americans Say President Trump Has Worsened Race Relations Since George Floyd's Death

It was once at least somewhat O.K. to be racist. It still is, for some, but they are dying out.

Absolute nonsense to anybody with an IQ over 25.
To claim that America is "systematically racist" is Leftist manure.

- Show me ONE example of a racist Law that exists on the books.
- Show me ONE example of a person of color NOT having the same opportunities as any white person in the last 30 years.
As a mater of fact - people of color have had MORE opportunities in that time span with Affirmative Action Laws.

Are there racists in America? Absolutely. There are racists EVERYWHERE - including and especially those in the BLM, Inc. crowd.
Does that make America a "systematically racist" nation? Only to a lying idiot . . .

 

[CadyandZoe]

Here is my non-legal answer, which I believe is Biblical. For the purposes of illustration, let's talk about two parents from the fictional country of Narnia, who happened to move to the United States in order to do business. While the couple must live in the US for business, they identify themselves as Narnians. They love their country, they are loyal to their country. If asked to return home, they would go. If asked to defend Narnia against the US they would. They would never betray Narnia, nor would they advocate for the overthrow of Narnia. Even while in the US, they remain loyal to Narnia and will work on her behalf whenever necessary. Narnia affords the couple many benefits and protections of their rights, their property and their livelihood. And if they should run into trouble in the US, they know that Narnia will come to their aide.

Suppose, then, that the couple had a baby born in the US. The baby is a sign of their love; flesh of their flesh; the two shall become one flesh. When born, the couple will want their child to also be a citizen of Narnia, with all the rights, privileges, and advantages afforded to Narnians. These Parents will teach the child to be loyal to Narnia, teaching the child about Narnian history, Narnian values, Narnian cultural practices and all things Narnian. And when the couple finally goes home, they will bring the child with them, expecting Narnia to accept their child into the country as a full fledged Narnian.

So then, one day the child decides to run for office in the US. Should the US allow a Narnian, loyal to Narnia, loyal to parents of Narnian Descent, a person sworn to defend and protect Narnia, hold the highest office in the US?

Constitution:
Section 1, Article 2
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.

Obviously, this clause was added to the constitution to guard against foreign influence. What better way for a Narnian to work in favor of Narnia than to birth and raise a child in the US that might become president one day? The Child will certainly remain loyal to the US until the US and Narnia come into conflict. Which people will have her undivided loyalty?

I couched this in fictional terms in order to allow the principle to emerge. I have no idea about Kamala as a person.