Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
I've come to the conclusion I must be a masochist. Apparently I enjoy beating my head against the wall...
Birthers Lay an Egg
- Thread starter Bfgrn
- Start date
I've come to the conclusion I must be a masochist. Apparently I enjoy beating my head against the wall...
Missourian
Diamond Member
The Hawaiian State law stipulates that a certified copy may be made at the behest of the person named in the record.
Unless you can provide a link to a law that requires that a certified copy cannot be issued (by law, not policy), what the state issues now in lieu of a Certificate is moot.
I have some errands to run, but I'll check back later.
"The law further states that the Health Department "shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record."
I have some errands to run, but I'll check back later.
Last edited:
paperview
Life is Good
Kenya believe it Emm? It's been a solid year now saying the same things over and over and over and over again. No shit. A solid year. Between the two of us, it has to be at least 5,000 posts - easy.
Just a revolving circle game.
But I too must be a masochist, cause here I am. Still. Batting at the thing they call
The BC.
Last edited:
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
paperview
Life is Good
From hereon forward, Emm, we shall know, till we are old and cratchety, practically every single law and statute pertaining to every minute detail, nuance and nitpiddlyfucking detail of Hawaiian Birth Certificates.
Much more than we ever needed to know.
Information, surely, that could be occupied in the gray matter for more important stuff.
Like how many ounces are in an anagram?
Much more than we ever needed to know.
Information, surely, that could be occupied in the gray matter for more important stuff.
Like how many ounces are in an anagram?
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0011.htm
§338-11 Form of certificates. The forms of certificates shall include as a minimum the items required by the respective standard certificates as recommended by the Public Health Service, National Center for Health Statistics, subject to approval of and modification by the department of health.
PART II
§338-41 Issuance; procedure. (a) The department of health may make regulations respecting the form of Hawaiian birth certificates and certified copies of such certificates and other matters relating to Hawaii birth certificates as appear necessary and the regulations, when approved and made in accordance with chapter 91, shall have the force of law. The department shall furnish the form of the certificates and copies made therefrom.
("Our Certificate of Live Birth is the standard form, which was modeled after national standards that are acceptable by federal agencies and organizations," Okubo said.
i.e. the law gives the state DOH legal authority to determine the form they will issue as long as they fit those standards, and their determination has the force of law. They only issue COLB, as provided by LAW)
---------
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0016.htm
(just as a point of interest for those who say his COLB was amended)
---------
Last edited:
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
Prior to Wong Kim Ark the Supreme Court had held that birthplace by itself was not sufficient to grant citizenship (Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 1884). U.S. citizenship law since Wong Kim Ark has acknowledged both jus soli (citizenship through place of birth) and jus sanguinis (citizenship inherited from parents). Wong Kim Ark's case was subsequently cited in two major Supreme Court decisions on citizenship: Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939) (involving a U.S.-born woman who was alleged to have lost her U.S. citizenship when her naturalized US citizen Swedish immigrant parents took her back to Sweden with them when she was a baby); and Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967) (involving a naturalized U.S. citizen who subsequently moved to Israel and was alleged to have lost his U.S. citizenship after voting in an Israeli election).
Jus sanguinis (Latin: right of blood) is a social policy by which nationality or citizenship is not determined by place of birth, but by having an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state. It contrasts with jus soli (Latin for "right of soil").
1790 First Congress, Act of March 26th, 1790, 1 Stat. 103.
"And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States".
1934 Act of May 24, 1934, Section 1, 48 Stat. 797.
"Any child hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose father or mother or both at the time of birth of such child is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States: but the rights of citizenship shall not descend to any such child unless the citizen father or citizen mother, as the case may be, has resided in the United States previous to the birth of such child. In cases where one of the parents is an alien, the right of citizenship shall not descend unless the child comes to the United States and resides therein for at least five years continuously immediately previous to his eighteenth birthday, and unless, within six months after the child's twenty-first birthday, he or she shall take an oath of allegiance to the United States of America as prescribed by the Bureau of Naturalization."
1940 The Nationality Act of 1940, Section 201, 54 Stat. 1137.
"Section 201. The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
"(g) A person born outside the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, has had ten years' residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, at least five of which were after attaining the age of sixteen years, the other being an alien: Provided, That in order to retain such citizenship, the child must reside in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling five years between the ages of thirteen and twenty-one years: Provided further, That, if the child has not taken up a residence in the United States or its outlying possessions by the time he reaches the age of sixteen years, or if he resides abroad for such a time that it becomes impossible for him to complete the five years' residence in the United States or its outlying possessions before reaching the age of twenty-one years, his American citizenship shall thereupon cease.
(h) The foregoing provisions of subsection (g) concerning retention of citizenship shall apply to a child born abroad subsequent to May 24, 1934."
1952 The Immigration and Nationality Act of June 27, 1952, 66 Stat. 163, 235, 8 U.S. Code Section 1401 (b). (Section 301 of the Act).
"Section 301. (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
"(1) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
"(7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.
History of US citizenship laws
The point I have been trying to make here is that the the United States has clearly recognized that when one parent is a citizen , regardless of where that child is born , that child is considered a citizen of this nation. There have been several cases that have dealt with the issue of citizenship in the SCOTUS while none specifically dealing with the matter of jurisdiction, however from time to time it has been mentioned as was the case in Dred Scott. While as I have said earlier I do understand why someone would question Barack Obama on this issue and his not respnoding to the issue has made it more of an issue that it need be. The issue of Obama's citizenship is IMHO a settled issue, and with many other issues that this president is involved in , this one tends to take away from the much focus upon the others.
Jus sanguinis (Latin: right of blood) is a social policy by which nationality or citizenship is not determined by place of birth, but by having an ancestor who is a national or citizen of the state. It contrasts with jus soli (Latin for "right of soil").
1790 First Congress, Act of March 26th, 1790, 1 Stat. 103.
"And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States".
1934 Act of May 24, 1934, Section 1, 48 Stat. 797.
"Any child hereafter born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, whose father or mother or both at the time of birth of such child is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States: but the rights of citizenship shall not descend to any such child unless the citizen father or citizen mother, as the case may be, has resided in the United States previous to the birth of such child. In cases where one of the parents is an alien, the right of citizenship shall not descend unless the child comes to the United States and resides therein for at least five years continuously immediately previous to his eighteenth birthday, and unless, within six months after the child's twenty-first birthday, he or she shall take an oath of allegiance to the United States of America as prescribed by the Bureau of Naturalization."
1940 The Nationality Act of 1940, Section 201, 54 Stat. 1137.
"Section 201. The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
"(g) A person born outside the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, has had ten years' residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, at least five of which were after attaining the age of sixteen years, the other being an alien: Provided, That in order to retain such citizenship, the child must reside in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling five years between the ages of thirteen and twenty-one years: Provided further, That, if the child has not taken up a residence in the United States or its outlying possessions by the time he reaches the age of sixteen years, or if he resides abroad for such a time that it becomes impossible for him to complete the five years' residence in the United States or its outlying possessions before reaching the age of twenty-one years, his American citizenship shall thereupon cease.
(h) The foregoing provisions of subsection (g) concerning retention of citizenship shall apply to a child born abroad subsequent to May 24, 1934."
1952 The Immigration and Nationality Act of June 27, 1952, 66 Stat. 163, 235, 8 U.S. Code Section 1401 (b). (Section 301 of the Act).
"Section 301. (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
"(1) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
"(7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.
History of US citizenship laws
The point I have been trying to make here is that the the United States has clearly recognized that when one parent is a citizen , regardless of where that child is born , that child is considered a citizen of this nation. There have been several cases that have dealt with the issue of citizenship in the SCOTUS while none specifically dealing with the matter of jurisdiction, however from time to time it has been mentioned as was the case in Dred Scott. While as I have said earlier I do understand why someone would question Barack Obama on this issue and his not respnoding to the issue has made it more of an issue that it need be. The issue of Obama's citizenship is IMHO a settled issue, and with many other issues that this president is involved in , this one tends to take away from the much focus upon the others.
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
The birthers need to give it up.
It's been proven to be part of God's plan:
Did Jesus actually reveal name of the 'antichrist'?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgHUZXgNAWo]YouTube - UPDATED VERSION! - DID JESUS GIVE US THE NAME OF THE ANTICHRIST?[/ame]
It's been proven to be part of God's plan:
Did Jesus actually reveal name of the 'antichrist'?
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgHUZXgNAWo]YouTube - UPDATED VERSION! - DID JESUS GIVE US THE NAME OF THE ANTICHRIST?[/ame]
Per Hawaiian law, Statue 338.13, any certified copies of the original document can serve the same purpose as the original document.
"(b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18."
Usually the certification is stamped and signed on the lower reverse side of the document and says "I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of Health
Vital records (birth, death, marriage, and divorce certificates) for events that occurred in Hawaii are received and preserved by the Office of Health Status Monitoring, a unit of the Department of Health. In Hawaii, access to vital records is restricted by statute (HRS §338-18
Who is Eligible to Apply for Certified Copies of Vital Records?
A certified copy of a vital record (birth, death, marriage, or divorce certificate) is issued only to an applicant who has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons are considered to have such an interest:
the registrant (the person whom the record is concerned with);
the registrant’s spouse;
the registrant’s parent(s);
a descendant of the registrant (e.g., a child or grandchild);
a person having a common ancestor with the registrant (e.g., a sibling, grandparent, aunt/uncle, or cousin);
a legal guardian of the registrant;
a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
a personal representative of the registrant’s estate;
a person whose right to obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child’s natural or legal parents;
a person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;
a person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and
a person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.
I find myself in the position of trying to understand how this is an issue, other than the fact that Obama won't take the time to apply for his original and just say "here it is". Other than that IMO aside from the fact he did attend school in another country and under another name as a minor child I can find no law where that would automatically disqualify him to run for office. In fact Obama's background is riddled with enough question marks to keep a person busy for some time, but IMO unless there is absolute proof of dual citizenship after the age of 18 or Obama renouncing his citizenship I'm afriad I cannot see where he would not meet the qualifications under the 14th Amendment.
"(b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18."
Usually the certification is stamped and signed on the lower reverse side of the document and says "I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of Health
Vital records (birth, death, marriage, and divorce certificates) for events that occurred in Hawaii are received and preserved by the Office of Health Status Monitoring, a unit of the Department of Health. In Hawaii, access to vital records is restricted by statute (HRS §338-18
Who is Eligible to Apply for Certified Copies of Vital Records?
A certified copy of a vital record (birth, death, marriage, or divorce certificate) is issued only to an applicant who has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons are considered to have such an interest:
the registrant (the person whom the record is concerned with);
the registrant’s spouse;
the registrant’s parent(s);
a descendant of the registrant (e.g., a child or grandchild);
a person having a common ancestor with the registrant (e.g., a sibling, grandparent, aunt/uncle, or cousin);
a legal guardian of the registrant;
a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
a personal representative of the registrant’s estate;
a person whose right to obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child’s natural or legal parents;
a person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;
a person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and
a person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.
I find myself in the position of trying to understand how this is an issue, other than the fact that Obama won't take the time to apply for his original and just say "here it is". Other than that IMO aside from the fact he did attend school in another country and under another name as a minor child I can find no law where that would automatically disqualify him to run for office. In fact Obama's background is riddled with enough question marks to keep a person busy for some time, but IMO unless there is absolute proof of dual citizenship after the age of 18 or Obama renouncing his citizenship I'm afriad I cannot see where he would not meet the qualifications under the 14th Amendment.
paperview
Life is Good
Oh my dear Lord save me.The birthers need to give it up.
It's been proven to be part of God's plan:
Did Jesus actually reveal name of the 'antichrist'?
YouTube - UPDATED VERSION! - DID JESUS GIVE US THE NAME OF THE ANTICHRIST?
I actually listened to that whole freakin dolphin-flipping piece of crap.
Please don't tell me there are those who walk among us who actually believe this canyon-deep pill of bullshit.
Please?
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
Oh my dear Lord save me.The birthers need to give it up.
It's been proven to be part of God's plan:
Did Jesus actually reveal name of the 'antichrist'?
YouTube - UPDATED VERSION! - DID JESUS GIVE US THE NAME OF THE ANTICHRIST?
I actually listened to that whole freakin dolphin-flipping piece of crap.
Please don't tell me there are those who walk among us who actually believe this canyon-deep pill of bullshit.
Please?
But of course. However, if they are true Christians they will realize the futility of their attempted interruption of God's plan and give it up.
EriktheRed
Eh...
they are making an extreme stretchOh my dear Lord save me.The birthers need to give it up.
It's been proven to be part of God's plan:
Did Jesus actually reveal name of the 'antichrist'?
YouTube - UPDATED VERSION! - DID JESUS GIVE US THE NAME OF THE ANTICHRIST?
I actually listened to that whole freakin dolphin-flipping piece of crap.
Please don't tell me there are those who walk among us who actually believe this canyon-deep pill of bullshit.
Please?
But of course. However, if they are true Christians they will realize the futility of their attempted interruption of God's plan and give it up.
especially since Jesus didnt speak in Hebrew
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
They did admit he spoke in Aramaic (did I spell that right lol) then did some sort of convoluted translation back into Hebrew. Allegedly.
RadiomanATL
Senior Member
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
Missourian
Diamond Member
And the Department of health has NO REGULATION against making exact copies of vital records...in fact they have an entire page of their website dedicated to just that, for geneology and such.
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/genealogy.html
Last edited:
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
Nothing there about getting an exact copy of an original. Their regulations (which, as pointed out above, have force of law) are that they only issue COLB for a request of birth certificate.
Here's something you can try, if you're so inclined.
This person was born more than 75 years ago. So you don't have to have a 'tangible interest' in order to get her records. Apply to get her birth records and see what shows up, then post it for us.
Attachments
Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist™
This part of your link shows that the state only issues certified copies of records less than 75 years old. And the only certified copies they issue now are COLB.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
Could The Trump Landslide Be America Living "they know not what they do,"????- Started by PoliticalChic
- Replies: 8
-
