Abstracted certificates (a.k.a., “short forms”) are what is used most often for official purposes. (Though some short forms omit parent information, and those are sometimes insufficient for things like passports.)
Do a google search on the legal definition of an abstracted birth certificate copy, what information it may or may not contain and it's validity and legality as an official document.
And you think I didn't already know or hadn't already done that?
Here's what the U.S. State Dept. lists as the necessary elements of a birth certificate:
Certified U.S. birth certificate (must meet all of the following requirements):(Highlights in original.)
* Issued by the City, County, or State of birth
*Lists bearer's full name, date of birth, and place of birth
*Lists parent(s) full names
*Has date filed with registrar's office (must be within one year of birth)
*Has registrar's signature
*Has embossed, impressed, or multicolored seal of registrar
*Photocopies and notarized copies are unacceptable
That is the information contained on the typical short form certificate.
So, as you can see, what I listed as contained on my children's computer-generated "short form" birth certificate meets the stated requirements. That explains why the State Department accepted them and issued passports using them as primary evidence of birth.
What is your basis for asserting that short forms are generally insufficient? (Again, I'm not including those omitting parent information as valid short forms).
The key to understanding Obama’s LFBC is to realize/acknowledge that the address listed as Stanley Ann’s ‘home address’ is one at which she and the baby NEVER resided. Once this fact is grasped, the rest falls neatly into place.
[BTW, it was not a so-called birther who established that fact. It was acclaimed leftist biographer and major Obama-fan David Maraniss. His bias was entirely in Obama’s favor, yet he had no recourse other than to acknowledge that the ‘home address’ on Obama’s BC is not one at which Stanley Ann and the baby EVER lived. Unlike most of his readers and one hundred percent of the Obots, Maraniss grasped how devastating to Obama’s birth narrative his discovery was. He tried to soften the blow by announcing, pre-publication, that he had located a witness who confirmed that Stanley Ann had given birth in a HI hospital. Unfortunately (for Obama fans) that claim was a patent lie. Maraniss’ research had torpedoed the ‘born in HI claim once and for all.]