Amend the United States Constitution to allow naturalized US citizens to run for President

Brenavia builds his argumentation against allowing naturalized citizens of the United States to become eligible to run for the office of President on the assumption that loyalty to one country is driven by the place of birth. I believe this is a fallacious and discriminatory assumption and will explain why shortly. To sustain his argumentation Brenavia quotes a study by The Natural Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago which states that found "Americans are the worlds most patriotic people" and " that 1/3 of all Americans are extremely patriotic" Brenavia then erroneously comes to the conclusion that "These articles are not refering to naturalized citizens, or else they would have stated this. There is no proof whatsoever that the article is referring to natural born citizens exclusively, and is important to note that naturalized americans are just as american as natural born citizens. Furthermore naturalized citizen are viewed by many as extremely patriotic, since they had to actively seek US Citizenship and were not just merely born with the privilege. [1] The question of loyalty is a very important one, however the assumption that a natural born citizen is by default loyal, and a naturalized is not, is wrong. Under the current Constitution, a Citizen who is born in the United States but moves to another country as a baby and grows up there could return to the US at age 50 for example, and being eligible to run for President at age 64. On the other hand though, somebody who is born in a different country and moves to the US as an infant, who grows up in the US and for whom the US is the only home he has ever known, is not eligible to run for President. This includes babies born abroad who are adopted by american parents. There are plenty of example throughout the History of the United States that show that loyalty is not guaranteed by birth. Jefferson Devies, the President of the Confederate States of America, who led the South in the rebellion against the Union, was a natural born US citizen. Abu Ibrahim Amriki and Anwar al-Awlaki, two Islamic terrorists who are responsible for attacks against the United States are both natural born United States Citizens. Harvey Lee Oswald, who deflected to the Soviet Union and came back to the US to assassinate President Kennedy was a natural born US Citizen. Naturalized citizens however have collectively received more than 700 medals of honor and make up a large percentage of the United States armed forces. The assumption that a naturalized President wouldn't be able to remain impartial in matters of foreign affairs while a natural born would is false. Many Presidents have spent time overseas. President Eisenhower was a dual US and German citizen. President Obama spent large parts of his life in Indonesia. A natural born President could be equally subject to the same bias, could have more friends and family in a different country than a naturalized citizen. Brenavia also argues that people born on US territories are loyal simply because "the fly the flag of the U.S", which is not necessarily through, since Puerto Rico, but even Alaska and Vermont have organized secessionist parties. Furthermore, allowing a naturalized citizen to run for President doesn't make this person automatically President. The candidate would still have to go through the electoral process, where his loyalty can be tested by the people of the United States who will have then to decide weather to trust this person with the Presidency. The natural born clause is an outdated, illogical part of the Constitution that should be revised to give all americans equal rights. 1] http://articles.baltimoresun.com...