You repeatedly stated in this thread that there was no reason for Hawaii to have Barack Obama's birth certificate, if he was not born in Hawaii. I provided you with a link to the specific statute of the state of Hawaii, that deals with just that, issuing birth certificates for individuals born out of state. So, rather than admit your error, you plow right on, and pose a hypothetical, as if you had always been correct.
That annoying habit of yours aside, let's say Obama does provide his birth certificate. If that birth certificate is in no way questionable, and he is shown via that birth certificate to meet the requirements of the Constitution as far as being native born, then he will have put to rest any claims of his being ineligible on that basis. If it doesn't show that he meets the requirements, he is ineligible. Barack Obama is quite capable of putting the question of his eligibility under the Constitution to rest, as far as being native born. But, he does not. You seem perfectly OK with this. If his birth certificate were to show Obama ineligible, what would that prove to you?
But you said that Hawaii will give a birth certificate to anyone regrdless of whether they were born there or not. So what does that prove to you?