Talk:John Bingham

message: It seems there's been a bit of a back-and-forth on one quote of Bingham's that opponents of birthright citizenship and especially Birthers use to argue that Bingham didn't intend the 14th Amendment to be interpreted as guaranteeing birthright citizenship. I've re-removed the quote after finding the full quote, which shows that Bingham's been taken wildly out of context.
The quote, as cited by Birthers, et al:
"I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen..."
The full quote:
"I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen; but, sir, I may be allowed to say further, that I deny that the Congress of the United States ever had the power or the color of power to say that any man born within the jurisdiction of the United States, not owning a foreign allegiance, is not and shall not be a citizen of the United States. Citizenship is his birthright, and neither the Congress nor the States can justly or lawfully take it from him."
Taken from the Congressional Globe: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=071/llcg071.db&recNum=332  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.106.142 (talk) 18:35, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: "Except for the addition of the first sentence of Section 1, which defined citizenship, the amendment weathered the Senate debate without substantial change.[3] The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868."
What does the word "except" mean here? --THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE  13:08, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote on birthright citizenship 

message: This bio almost without citations (refs) IMHO looks too much like the answers.com bio in the External Links, down to the four footnotes citing the 1947 case (decades after Bingham's death) of Adamson v California. I have no time or desire to check whether there's a copyright violation. I checked that link because I wondered whether Bingham's religious faith had any bearing on his Radical Republican views, and noted from a link on the Cadiz, Ohio wikipedia article that Cadiz had a prominent Methodist Episcopal bishop with radical republican tendencies in this era. But this article doesn't mention Bingham's faith at all, and I don't have the time to look up the new bio under Further Reading, merely wonder whether there were earlier bios.Jweaver28 (talk) 12:36, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  answers.com 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Bingham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150203030332/http://www.therestorationmovement.com/walker.htm to http://www.therestorationmovement.com/walker.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified