·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Arizona birther bill passed
Arizona birther bill passedFollow
It seems odd that the law would allow an "early baptismal certificate" to serve as evidence of natural born citizenship given that babies aren't baptized immediately at birth (even among devout Catholics you have some lag time in there) and the church makes no attempt to authenticate the infant's birthplace or age. Or even records his birthplace on the certificate. I could have a baby born in Mongolia, bring him to the US two weeks later and have him baptized and I'd have a document that passes muster under the AZ state law.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
It seems odd that the law would allow an "early baptismal certificate" to serve as evidence of natural born citizenship given that babies aren't baptized immediately at birth (even among devout Catholics you have some lag time in there) and the church makes no attempt to authenticate the infant's birthplace or age. Or even records his birthplace on the certificate. I could have a baby born in Mongolia, bring him to the US two weeks later and have him baptized and I'd have a document that passes muster under the AZ state law.
If I had to guess it is because they "know" that Obama is an African (Hawaiian) Muslim (Christian).
Jophiel wrote:
It seems odd that the law would allow an "early baptismal certificate" to serve as evidence of natural born citizenship given that babies aren't baptized immediately at birth (even among devout Catholics you have some lag time in there) and the church makes no attempt to authenticate the infant's birthplace or age. Or even records his birthplace on the certificate. I could have a baby born in Mongolia, bring him to the US two weeks later and have him baptized and I'd have a document that passes muster under the AZ state law.
Seems like they just culled that part from the federal req's for Secondary Evidence of Citizenship:
http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/secondary_evidence/secondary_evidence_4315.html wrote:
Secondary Evidence of U.S. Citizenship
If you cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship, you must submit secondary evidence of U.S. citizenship. Determine what form of secondary evidence is most appropriate for your situation based on the descriptions below.
Early Public Records
If you were born in the United States and cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship, submit a combination of early public records as evidence of your U.S. citizenship. Early public records must be submitted with a birth record or Letter of No Record. Early public records should show your name, date of birth, place of birth, and preferably be created within the first five years of your life. Examples of early public records are:
* Baptismal certificate
* Hospital birth certificate
* Census record
* Early school record
* Family bible record
* Doctor's record of post-natal care
Early Public Records are not acceptable when presented alone.
If you cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship, you must submit secondary evidence of U.S. citizenship. Determine what form of secondary evidence is most appropriate for your situation based on the descriptions below.
Early Public Records
If you were born in the United States and cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship, submit a combination of early public records as evidence of your U.S. citizenship. Early public records must be submitted with a birth record or Letter of No Record. Early public records should show your name, date of birth, place of birth, and preferably be created within the first five years of your life. Examples of early public records are:
* Baptismal certificate
* Hospital birth certificate
* Census record
* Early school record
* Family bible record
* Doctor's record of post-natal care
Early Public Records are not acceptable when presented alone.
AZ requires two of them, and they're more strict about which ones.
Edited, Apr 15th 2011 11:18am by Eske
Jophiel wrote:
It seems odd that the law would allow an "early baptismal certificate" to serve as evidence of natural born citizenship given that babies aren't baptized immediately at birth (even among devout Catholics you have some lag time in there) and the church makes no attempt to authenticate the infant's birthplace or age. Or even records his birthplace on the certificate. I could have a baby born in Mongolia, bring him to the US two weeks later and have him baptized and I'd have a document that passes muster under the AZ state law.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Another hilarious thing is Beck (and O'Reilly) have both come out and said "His birth in America is legit, stop fighting such a dumb fight." The comments section of this article (from one of Beck's sites, TheBlaze) quickly turns on its own creator with comments like:
Oh, delicious irony.
By the way, never read the comments at that site. It's like a Varus family reunion.
Quote:
Actually, I am beginning to think that Beck is washed up...
I think Beck has expended himself, and has nothing left
Last year I commented that Beck showed signs of backing down and it could be he’s sold out.
Beck is starting to sound like Alinsky in his ridicule of birthers. I am greatly disappointed by that development.
Sorry Glenn, but if the Communist and Chief refuses to do something simple like show the certificate, then obviously there is something wrong……I think Donald Trump is right on this one
I think Beck has expended himself, and has nothing left
Last year I commented that Beck showed signs of backing down and it could be he’s sold out.
Beck is starting to sound like Alinsky in his ridicule of birthers. I am greatly disappointed by that development.
Sorry Glenn, but if the Communist and Chief refuses to do something simple like show the certificate, then obviously there is something wrong……I think Donald Trump is right on this one
Oh, delicious irony.
By the way, never read the comments at that site. It's like a Varus family reunion.
varusword75 wrote:
And people running for president should have the expectation that what they've done in college or as a lawmaker should be open to the public for scrutiny.
That is against the law
LockeColeMA wrote:
varusword75 wrote:
And people running for president should have the expectation that what they've done in college or as a lawmaker should be open to the public for scrutiny.
That is against the law
Since when do they care about the law?
SwiftAusterity wrote:
It's hidden to me, that's all I care about ;)
It has once again served it's purpose as well, which is described in my posting location text.
It has once again served it's purpose as well, which is described in my posting location text.
So you're posting to yourself...? Interesting.
Also, this thread isn't derailed. I wasn't participating in the actual topic beforehand, and no one else gives a shit about our side conversation. Two people does not a derail make.
varusword75 wrote:
Locked,
Perhaps you should spend some more time in college learning what the word 'expectation' means.
Perhaps you should spend some more time in college learning what the word 'expectation' means.
Why do that when you could just look it up online for free? I thought you were against overspending.
I'm all for a change of the law. Politicians (or really, any public figure) should be under scrutiny. If they want to be in the public eye, then put the bastards under a magnifying glass and let them deal with the consequences. My issue is the reason for this change is absolutely petty. Okay, his birth certificate isn't as complete (but still legit by the current standard) as the losers' party wants it to be. Instead of constantly going after the last guy, just make it so the next guy can't sneak through. Its like having a sworn statement of a police report thrown out because the suspect didn't cross the t in his name, and damn if I haven't seen that happen before.
Really, get the law made, and drop it for the current administration. He's not doing any worse at this than the last six or so guys.
Really, get the law made, and drop it for the current administration. He's not doing any worse at this than the last six or so guys.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
varusword75 wrote:
We don't know if it's complete or not. That's the problem.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
varusword75 wrote:
lolgax,
We don't know if it's complete or not. That's the problem.
Quote:
Okay, his birth certificate isn't as complete (but still legit by the current standard) as the losers' party wants it to be
We don't know if it's complete or not. That's the problem.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#42REDACTED,
Posted: Apr 15 2011 at 10:22 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I don't expect to derail threads that have subjects which themselves are the most enormous derailments of national discourse in modern times.
SwiftAusterity wrote:
I don't expect to derail threads that have subjects which themselves are the most enormous derailments of national discourse in modern times.
Aside from that, my ROI is already through the roof given my initial investment in the derailment was almost 0. Differently colored text added as a rider on a post that was actually on topic not targetting anyone specific; it's all about the ROI.
Aside from that, my ROI is already through the roof given my initial investment in the derailment was almost 0. Differently colored text added as a rider on a post that was actually on topic not targetting anyone specific; it's all about the ROI.
Kinda a pointless bill. If they didn't print the name of a presidential candidate by denying the birth record presented from any other state, they'd be in violation of the Full Faith and Credit clause.
He didn't fight to have the records sealed. The certificate of live birth is not used for "babies not born in Hawaii". Obama has not fought this in court, ever. Cases requesting other private information such as college records/applications have been thrown out because of their illegality on the part of the requesting party. It is Hawaii law that birth certificates can only be released to specific people under certain circumstances, which was done 3 years ago when the issue came up. If you were anyone else other than gbaji/Alma I'd be shocked at how much you can get factually wrong in one sitting.
No, "what they've done in college" should not be made public. That is completely contrary to the academic freedom of sifting and winnowing.
Yes, we do.
Edited, Apr 15th 2011 11:49am by bsphil
varusword75 wrote:
Locked,
about that;
I'm sorry but you don't fight to have all your records sealed, and I mean all of them from birth to college to state lawmaker, unless you have something to hide.
Quote:
certificate of live birth from Hawaii
about that;
Quote:
His online Certification of Live Birth is a document that has been obtained for babies not born in Hawaii, because the state's loose laws required only a declaration by a family member or witness in the case of unattended births.
The newspaper notices of birth that she cited, several days after the birth, were generated automatically by the state health department and were given to the newspapers, which did not independently check them. The notice would have been generated by the system should someone have registered Barack Obama's birth in Hawaii, whether he was born there or not.
The president has declined – and has fought in court – efforts to obtain access to his college records, Punahou records, records as an Illinois state lawmaker, college application and financial aid information records, other college records, adoption records and others.
Little information has been revealed about his travels, including his time spent in Pakistan.
Even the marriage and divorce records for his mother have not been released.
Read more: Obama's half-sister joins eligibility talk-show tour <lol WND article>
The newspaper notices of birth that she cited, several days after the birth, were generated automatically by the state health department and were given to the newspapers, which did not independently check them. The notice would have been generated by the system should someone have registered Barack Obama's birth in Hawaii, whether he was born there or not.
The president has declined – and has fought in court – efforts to obtain access to his college records, Punahou records, records as an Illinois state lawmaker, college application and financial aid information records, other college records, adoption records and others.
Little information has been revealed about his travels, including his time spent in Pakistan.
Even the marriage and divorce records for his mother have not been released.
Read more: Obama's half-sister joins eligibility talk-show tour <lol WND article>
I'm sorry but you don't fight to have all your records sealed, and I mean all of them from birth to college to state lawmaker, unless you have something to hide.
varusword75 wrote:
Locked,
And people running for president should have the expectation that what they've done in college or as a lawmaker should be open to the public for scrutiny.
Quote:
Working in a University, I can tell you for a fact that all records on admissions, applications, and financial aid are naturally sealed
And people running for president should have the expectation that what they've done in college or as a lawmaker should be open to the public for scrutiny.
varusword75 wrote:
lolgax,
We don't know if it's complete or not. That's the problem.
Quote:
Okay, his birth certificate isn't as complete (but still legit by the current standard) as the losers' party wants it to be
We don't know if it's complete or not. That's the problem.
Edited, Apr 15th 2011 11:49am by bsphil
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
bsphil wrote:
He didn't fight to have the records sealed. The certificate of live birth is not used for "babies not born in Hawaii". Obama has not fought this in court, ever.
Well, I'm assuming his attorneys filed motions to dismiss. The reports that he spent a bajillion dollars hiding it are completely fabricated though. At best, people try to point to FEC declarations of $X to some law firm or another while ignoring the fact that a political campaign may have uses for lawyers beyond Birther nuttiness. Any campaign organization is going to keep attorneys on retainer anyway and getting them to fire off some boilerplate motions isn't exactly a major expense.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
bsphil wrote:
He didn't fight to have the records sealed. The certificate of live birth is not used for "babies not born in Hawaii". Obama has not fought this in court, ever.
I was inarticulate.
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
SwiftAusterity wrote:
It's hidden to me, that's all I care about ;)
It has once again served it's purpose as well, which is described in my posting location text.
It has once again served it's purpose as well, which is described in my posting location text.
Well, stop being so self-satisfied about it, at least. No one thinks it's clever. No one thinks you are clever.
It's a stupid posting gimmick that suggests everyone's far more interested in what you really have to say (oh! he was being ironic! how droll) than they really are.
Kavekk wrote:
SwiftAusterity wrote:
It's hidden to me, that's all I care about ;)
It has once again served it's purpose as well, which is described in my posting location text.
It has once again served it's purpose as well, which is described in my posting location text.
Well, stop being so self-satisfied about it, at least. No one thinks it's clever. No one thinks you are clever.
It's a stupid posting gimmick that suggests everyone's far more interested in what you really have to say (oh! he was being ironic! how droll) than they really are.
I use the EQ Classic stylesheet and have no idea what you people are talking about.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
I use the EQ Classic stylesheet and have no idea what you people are talking about.
This is a true instance of blissful ignorance.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
So under this new Arizona law, can the Prince of Belgium run and serve as President of the United States? Because Prince Philippe, Duke of Brabant, is a descendant of the Marquis de La Fayette, who was declared a natural born citizen along with every male heir in perpetuity.
That should pass the mustard right?
That should pass the mustard right?
Recent Visitors: 323
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (323)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Arizona birther bill passed
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC