Talk:John Bingham

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) person(s).

United States: Ohio Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Quote on birthright citizenship

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)[reply]

I have a question about this sentence in the article:

"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)[reply]

answers.com

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)[reply]

External links modified

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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 21:57, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Bingham → John Armor Bingham – this is a lot more distinct and useful in helping him stand out, especially since Johnathan Brewster Bingham also got involved with 14th amendment and people are going around shortening his name to John Bingham too. 64.228.90.251 (talk) 17:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Only appropriate if he was more commonly referred to by his full name. See WP:MIDDLE. The other Bingham seems to be commonly called Jonathan Bingham, not John. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:38, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, doesn't seem like his nickname is used at all in most references so seems contratry to WP:COMMONNAME.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:46, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, there doesn't seem to be any need for it. He's known as John Bingham, the other guy isn't. --Coemgenus (talk) 15:01, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.