[mlo]

"If it's not been altered, and for most purposes, but not all purposes. Even the State of Hawaii won't accept if for at least some purposes. Similar forms in other states, but AFAIK not Hawaii, will not be accepted for a passport application, because they don't contain enough information to verify citizenship."

Whether it's been altered is another issue.

I've seen no legitimate documentation that the state of Hawaii does not accept these documents as proof of the facts contained on them. They don't contain every fact about a person, like ancestry beyond the parents, so the program for native Hawaiians that has been cited here repeatedly properly asks for additional documentation. That has nothing to do with not accepting or trusting the birth certificate.

If there are any cites for Hawaiian uses that reject the validity of their own birth certificates, I haven't seen them, and I doubt they exist.

However, note that logically speaking, showing an exception to the rule does not invalidate the rule. A hypothetical program that doesn't accept birth certificates does not mean that birth certificates are not legal proof.

Arguing for forgery is one thing. Arguing that birth certificates aren't really birth certificates comes close to being nonsensical.

[El Gato]

If there are any cites for Hawaiian uses that reject the validity of their own birth certificates, I haven't seen them, and I doubt they exist.

Of course they don't reject the validity, they reject the sufficiency.