Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Tennessee Nana

Footprints are not that dumb an idea. An infant’s fingerprint is not well developed at birth but a foot print is much more so. Once the print is created, it does not change whether the print is on the finger or the foot. I wish that all birth certificates in the world today had a self-proving feature like a footprint which would reduce the rampant fraud that exists in this area. Stop and think about it, how else can you link a document to the individual who claims a birth certificate is his offical document.


9,739 posted on 08/24/2009 3:33:15 AM PDT by iontheball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9735 | View Replies ]


To: iontheball

IIRC the orginal use of footprints was to make sure the babies were not switch.


9,741 posted on 08/24/2009 7:38:25 AM PDT by hoosiermama (ONLY DEAD FISH GO WITH THE FLOW.......I am swimming with Sarahcudah! Sarah has read the tealeaves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9739 | View Replies ]

To: iontheball

I didnt say it ws dumb...footprints belong only to that one person..They could help in identfying an infant...

But they were meant to be a keepsake...not a legal document...

If I could not use it to get my child into kindergarten, why would it be accepted for POTUS ???

Anyway the foot print of a 48? year old man is different than a brand new baby...

I’m sure there are ways to link those...

BTW have you ever tried to join a historical society ??? To prove you are connected to your ancestors ???

You need much more proof than it apparantly takes to be POTUS..


9,744 posted on 08/24/2009 9:08:04 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9739 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson