Replies

And yet you still chose to post an obsolete law rather than the actual current law in the effort to justify demanding more information than DOH has already released. Other than this being a tacit acknowledgment that they have already given you everything the law prescribes, it was bald attempt at deception.

It's not obsolete. This shows there's no reason to protect the file number, among other things on the certificates. It also clearly states there are exceptions to 338-18(b). Sorry, but you're flatout wrong. They haven't given everything the law prescribes.

Nobody in the entire State Government (let alone the DOH) has "unlimited discretionary authority." They are in fact bound by statute to those limitations enacted by the legislature, and (as we have seen) these limitation are acknowledged in the UIPA regs as well.

No, the UIPA acknowledges not the limitation but the exception to limitations when outweighed by public interest. It's there in black and white and the example shown in the manual proves it.

A COLB is a self authenticating document.

... IN A COURT OF LAW. On a Web site operated by amateur, incompetent self-declared "fact checkers," not in the slightest. The thing that makes it self-authenticating is whether the court can tell if the seal and signature passes the smell test. Obama's COLB is just like the diapers Obama's mama's friend had to change. Maybe some baby wipes might be in order so you can see what's going on.

"It's not obsolete."

Yet another word for you look up.

"This shows there's no reason to protect the file number, among other things on the certificates."

Then why did they change the law to remove it? This stuff is not rocket science, edge. But you do have to honestly think about it.

"No, the UIPA acknowledges not the limitation but the exception to limitations when outweighed by public interest. It's there in black and white and the example shown in the manual proves it."

Listen to yourself. How can there be exceptions to limitations if there are no limitations?

I have no idea why you imagine the director of the Hawaii DOH has unlimited Cosmic Power, but they don't. They still have to follow the law.

And again, when you manage to show us how an infant's birth is comparable to the record of a senior official executing an important job, then I for one will stop laughing at your "example."

"IN A COURT OF LAW."

Exactly. Since you are not a court of law, you deserve even less.