My father was adopted. His BC has his adopted parents listed as his parents and states when & where he was born, who delivered him, and race and gender. He was born in California. In this case there was no other BC, sealed or otherwise, no listing of biological parents.
What I am trying to emphasize here is simple. If Obama had been adopted it wouldn’t alter the fact of his having been born in Hawaii. He has explained about his life in Indonesia with Lolo and his mother. So really, there is no reason we should not have seen his BC - if he HAD been born in Hawaii!
I DON’T BUY THE EXCUSE HE MAY BE ASHAMED OF SOMETHING: ONE DOESN’T GO TO THE BOTHER AND EXPENSE OF HIDING A BIRTH CERTIFICATE UNLESS IT DIRECTLY IMPACTS ON ONE’S ELIGIBILITY.
His Hawaiian school records for kindergarten are missing - someone was bribed to remove those records which contained a copy of his BC and other pertinent data such as real name and birthplace.
He is hiding the fact he wasn’t born in the United States.
I guess what you're driving at is that some people say "he's just trying to avoid talking about his adoption, so what's the big deal?", but your take is: that's what he wants people to think - in reality he doesn't want the adoption BC to see the light of day because it voids his eligibility, since it still shows, just as his original BC did (but presumably court sealed or legally destroyed), a birth situation that rules out being a natural-born citizen.