LOLZ! LOLZ!Oh so now he was born to a single mother.... as if daddy wasn’t married to mommy... gotcha.
Sorry Barry, if Mom and dad were married you aren’t illegitimate.
You already admitted you were born under the jurisdiction of Great Britain.
Whoever the idiot was that thought that up, they missed the fact that he wasn’t raised IN KANSAS.
“I was born in Hawaii to a single mother.”
Holy Cow!
Single mother???
What happened to BHO Sr and the “improbable love” and marriage??
This looks to me like a signal that the Obama campaign team is pivoting to the “bastard child of a single mother thus unitary US citizenship at birth and not a UK subject at birth” defence on the NBC issue.
Maybe the book “The Other Barack” showing his father was considered by the US INS and U of HI officials to be a bigamist and sexual predator gave them the opening they needed to throw BHO Sr under the bus!
This doesn't get Obama a genuine HI BC but he can still count on HI officials to back him up on that. Meanwhile by declaring his mother to have been single when he was born (as Mooshell said way back when, remember?) gives him strong cover on the NBC issue...because a bastard child cannot be a dual citizen regardless of who his father is.
Where did that show up? Is that authorized by Obama himself?
If these are the claims he’s making now, then he’s claiming that somebody in Hawaii definitely needs to go to jail for manipulating the 1960-65 marriage index as well as the 1960-64 birth index.
A report by the Canadian Welfare Council of 1957 estimated there were about thirty such homes across Canada. By the end of the 1960’s there were roughly fifty homes” – “Gone to an Aunts”, Anne Petrie
During the 1800’s compassionate Victorian ladies were disturbed by the plight of unmarried mothers who had no resources and strived to create “Maternity Homes” which were homes to give those mothers a safe place to take their pregnancy to term, and to learn to care for and nurture their babies. At no time were mothers and babies separated, and in fact, in Minnesota, there was actually a Breast Feeding Statute that stated a mother had to breast feed for at least three months (Minnesota Three Month Nursing Regulation), which was devised to keep mother and child together and to promote bonding. The mother in this scenario however, was a “Fallen Women” and her baby labelled “illegitimate” or a “bastard”. The stigma attached to these labels were heavy indeed.
After World War II with the onset of the profession of Social Work, society decided that unmarried mothers could be rehabilitated or “made marriageable” again after being pregnant and giving birth. These same Maternity Homes and policies that were devised to help mothers and children stay together now became the means to separate them as adoption became the vehicle by which a mother could “be redeemed”.
Many of these homes were run by religious organizations in conjunction with the province. The Salvation Army and the Misericordia Sisters were the most prominent, but each denomination seemed to have their own facility for the “unwed mother” as the list below will show.
In her article “Not By Choice” Karen Wilson Buterbaugh shows how thought reform was alive and well in the Maternity Homes of that period.
Keep a Person Unaware
Girls were not instructed about pregnancy, labor, delivery; were left totally alone during labor and delivery; were not allowed contact with new mothers; not provided information about welfare and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), child support and other government programs.
Control their environment and time.
Girls forced to live in maternity “homes”; made to use fictitious names or first names and last initials only; allowed no contact with friends and boy-friends by letter, phone or in person; kept away from everything familiar; made to follow strict daily routines.
Create a sense of powerlessness.
Took away our money (pay phones only); no personal (familiar) clothing; not allowed freedom to come and go; removed everything that would remind us of who we were.
Rewards and punishments to inhibit behaviour reflecting former identity.
Called “neurotic” if we said no to “relinquishing”; told we were “out of touch with reality” and “selfish” if we kept our babies; told our pregnancy was “proof of unfitness.”
Rewards and punishments promoting group’s beliefs or behaviors.
Allowed no television, phone, visitation or radio privileges if not following rules; scolding and de-meaning lectures for disagreeing; harangued when speaking up against “counseling” (reasons why we should “choose” adoption); praised for agreeing to surrender.
Use logic and authority which permits no feedback.
Director, caseworkers and housemothers enforced strict rules and rigid schedule: wakeup, bedtime, meals, chores and approved visitation; censored mail (both incoming and outgoing); no legal counsel; no support system.
It seems clear that all of the thought reform conditions were present during the many months we were forced to hide away in maternity homes.
Rickie Solinger, in Wake Up Little Susie: Single Pregnancy and Race Before Roe v. Wade (1992), gives us a sense of the maternity home environment:
The world of maternity homes in postwar America was a gothic attic obscured from the community by the closed curtains of gentility and high spiked fences. The girls and women sent inside were dreamwalkers serving time, pregnant dreamwalkers taking the cure. Part criminal, part patient, the unwed mother arrived on the doorstep with her valise and, moving inside, found herself enclosed within an idea…
Maternity homes… served to further stigmatize pregnant young women by removing them from their families, friends and neighbors… these “homes” could create an austere and frightening atmosphere for the mother, whose freedom of movement was strictly curtailed by these instant chaperones and guardians. Typically, mothers were expected to help out in these homes with chores such as cleaning, dishwashing, and so on… while the mother’s physical needs were met, seldom were her emotional needs addressed…
Most of these homes are now closed and thankfully so, but the history of the”Home for Unwed Mother” is not over as the mothers that resided there from after World War II to well into the l980’s are now giving voice to their stories and experiences during their incarceration there, and their stories must be preserved for their children.
http://www.originscanada.org/homes-for-unwed-mothers/