Nope. Natural born means to be a citizen from birth. Prior to the 13th and 14th amendments, even many who were born here were not considered "natural born citizens". And one reading of the 14th amendment supports the view that children born to illegal aliens are not entitled to US Citizenship.
Originally Posted by davidmcbeth
Wiki discusses the issue in some detail.
The use of the phrase "natural born" was not without precedent. Statutes in England prior to American independence used the phrase "natural born subject". For example, the British Foreign Protestants Naturalization Act 1708:
The children of all natural born subjects born out of the ligeance [i.e. out of England] of Her Majesty Her Heirs and Successors shall be deemed and adjudged to be natural born subjects of this Kingdom to all intents, constructions, and purposes whatsoever.
Another example is the Plantation Act 1740:
[A]ll persons born out of the legience of His Majesty, His Heirs, or Successors, who have . . . or shall inhabit or reside for . . . seven years or more in any of His Majesty’s colonies in America . . . shall be deemed, adjudged, and taken to be His Majesty’s natural-born subjects of this Kingdom.
The famed jurist William Blackstone wrote in 1765 that inhabitants born within England may be natural-born subjects: "Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England...." Blackstone added that offspring who are not inhabitants may also be natural born subjects:
But by several more modern statutes ... all children, born out of the king's ligeance, whose fathers were natural-born subjects, are now natural-born subjects themselves, to all intents and purposes, without any exception; unless their said fathers were attainted, or banished beyond sea, for high treason; or were then in the service of a prince at enmity with Great Britain.
A leading authority in England prior to Blackstone was Edward Coke, who wrote about this subject in Calvin's Case. According to Coke: "[I]f any of the King's ambassadors in foreign nations, have children there of their wives, being English women, by the common laws of England they are natural-born subjects, and yet they are born out-of the King's dominions."
Furthermore, the issue of natural born citizens born abroad being eligible for the Presidency was pretty well resolved in 1967 during George Romney's presidential bid.
(Original on Wiki has footnotes with sources for material claims.)
Questions were occasionally asked about Romney's eligibility to hold the office of President due to his birth in Mexico, given the ambiguity in the United States Constitution over the phrase "natural-born citizen". His Mormon paternal grandfather and his three wives had fled to Mexico in 1886, but none of them ever relinquished U.S. citizenship. Romney's parents chose U.S. citizenship for their children, including George. The family fled Mexico and came to the United States in 1912 during the Mexican Revolution.
By February 1967, some newspapers were questioning Romney's eligibility given his Mexican birth. In May 1967, the Democratic chair of the House Judiciary Committee, Emanuel Celler, said he had "serious doubts" about whether Romney was eligible, but had no plans to formally challenge the matter. Another member of Congress made a case against Romney the following month. In response, the New York Law Journal published an article by a senior attorney at Sullivan & Cromwell arguing that Romney was, in fact, eligible. The Congressional Research Service also came down on Romney's side, as did most other constitutional experts at the time.
During the campaign, Romney was generally considered a viable and legal candidate for United States president. He departed the race before the matter could be more definitively resolved, although the preponderance of opinion since then has been that he was eligible.
I've never heard of such a thing except where complications were expected and better medical facilities were available in the US. Indeed, a google search reveals that it is common for dependents deployed overseas with military (or diplomatic) spouses to give birth without returning to the US. See this article for a first person account. There is a reason the form FS-240, or Consular Report of a Birth Abroad, exists.
Originally Posted by davidmcbeth
Quite simply, you are wrong, and have failed to provide any meaningful citation to back up your position.