Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: CpnHook
Deflection. Your insistence on focusing on the 1982 law as being substantially different from the 1957 law, when they both allowed for the same consequences is an example of you pouncing on a trifle, to the exclusion of the main point.

Hawaiian law permits birth certificates to be issued on the "say so" of others. Ergo, Obama could have a birth certificate created by his Grandmother for a birth that did not actually occur in Hawaii.

Please do try and keep up. Better yet, realize the topic is beyond your comprehension level, and go away.

You are just a childish noise machine.


266 posted on 09/30/2015 1:48:45 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp
Hawaiian law permits birth certificates to be issued on the "say so" of others. Ergo, Obama could have a birth certificate created by his Grandmother for a birth that did not actually occur in Hawaii.

Birthers have managed to come up with one measly example from the turn of the last century, which arose under circumstances quite distinguishable from Obama's. Hardly an impressive argument. Though you're still off the mark in the end. More below.

Better yet, realize the topic is beyond your comprehension level, and go away.

Speaking of comprehension level, let me see if I can dumb this down a bit to your level so you might stand a chance of getting it.

The Territorial laws contemplated (Sec. 57-8) that in the usual case the birth information would be obtained from the attending physician and/or the mother. The laws did then go on to add that if neither of those were able to provide the information, then in that case the Registrar could procure the information from another person.

But now the shrewd person will ask: Is there a way to tell from the Birth Certificate which issued whether this was a "doctor/mother case" or a "granny/other-person case."

Well, gosh, yes there is. Because on the Birth Certificate one can observe . . . (now pay close attention) . . . information about the Hawaiian birth hospital, the doctor's name and signature, and the mother's name and signature!!

So from this it's pretty clear that Granny Dunham was not registering a supposed home birth (one she claimed was took place in Hawaii but REALLY (wink, wink) occurred somewhere else. It's overly bizarre to posit that Granny went in to claim a home birth and what emerged was a Birth Certificate with a hospital and attending physician's names (and signature with the latter).

Yeah, the Chinese guy got a birth certificate based on the testimony of some friends. But he got one that simply stated a birth in the location; he didn't get one with hospital and doctor.

That's how one can tell the difference.

Got it now, DumbDumb?

276 posted on 10/01/2015 2:15:42 PM PDT by CpnHook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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