In line with studies of dual citizenship that point to the need for in-depth understanding of the reasoning behind this legislative change, this study provides an analysis of the discourse that lawmakers parlayed during the debate that resulted in the passage of the Philippine citizenship retention and reacquisition law in 2003. Because of the constitutional prohibition against dual allegiance, legislators constructed a narrative with emotive force to justify emigration as well as naturalization in the destination, the latter act portrayed as devoid of political love that Filipinos supposedly reserve for the homeland. Emblematic of affective citizenship even while the state actually instrumentalized it, the passage of the law affirmed a traditional notion of exclusive singular citizenship, while concomitantly providing indirect tolerance of dual, nonexclusive citizenship for conationals overseas.