I try to avoid 'absolutes' - but it always amazes me how people who write Letters to the Editor (or opinion pieces to the newspapers) citing the U.S. Constitution are ALWAYS WRONG.
They misrepresent or overextend the meaning of the amendment they cite. It happened again last week.
I met a guy in some parking lot and within moments he steered our conversation to the selfishness and corruption of our politicians and elected legislators. He immediately revealed his Tea Party-conservative leanings when he volunteered how he had recently called Sen. McCain's office to ask why the senator had not "prosecuted" President Obama for violating the Constitution. He claimed that it was required that BOTH parents (of the president) be native born Americans. I questioned him on that requirement as I was not familiar with it...but he was adamant that it was there. He also recalled an interview with Obama's grandmother wherein she stated that Barak was born right there in their little village in Africa. He imitated her excitement by pumping his arms in the air.
Not wanting to reopen the 'Birther Issue' I excused myself and went to the Library to clear up the issue involving parental birth of a president.
If you're still wondering...there is no such requirement. But there is a Constitutional Right to Free Speech... and the Right To Be Wrong. Or is that stretching the statute too far?