What's being certified here are the facts of a particular birth. The parents and doctor actually do most of the certification. The facts which they certified were recorded on a typed birth certificate.
A certificate shows what has been certified by those qualified to certify the facts. The old birth certificate showed what had been certified 48 years ago for Obama.
No one today who wasn't there can certify what happened 48 years ago. They can do one of two things:
1. Certify that they are providing a true copy of an original birth certificate from 48 years ago. No process involved, just copying a source document.
2. Certify that they have examined available records and reproduced the 48 year old information on a new print out. The are certifying, 48 years later, that they have examined available records and transposed it via computer to a new printout, certifying that the information gathered is correct. They went through some certification process 48 years later to verify the information presented on a new document.
There's a difference. Sorry you can't see it. The two should have different designations.
Of course the two should have different designations. My point was that “certificate” and “certification” cannot intelligently be the two designating terms. Bureaucrat fiat may try to make these two words work as “different designations,” but they only will “mean differently” if someone like you writes a dozen paragraphs explain why identical terms actually mean different things.
Wouldn’t it be easier to use terms that really are different? Neither you nor the bureaucrats would have to write these long explanations.
But that would be simple. And bureaucrat and simple don’t mix. They are both different terms AND very different realities.