Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't even get this short form/long form thing since whatever leads up to the short form being issued is the only thing we need to prove anything for constitutional purposes. We can define "natural born citizen" any way we like really, and already have some exceptions to being born outside the USA proper. Apparently, having a short form with the right info is how we have chosen to define it. OK then.
States will pass laws and your messiah will not be able to prove he is a natural born citizen, hense not be on the ballot.
As has been patiently explained to you, individual states cannot add their own qualifications for Presidential eligibility. They're outlined in the Constitution.
Which is why the states won't pass any laws, no matter how much you wish for it. Challenging a Hawaiian COLB is a sure way to suffer a humiliating legal loss. Article IV, Section 1.
The thing that is glaringly apparent is hussein obama's minions must feel strongly they have something to fear if these laws are passed. If they really had any faith he was a natural born citizen this would not even be an issue for them.
it's 1983. 10 states are proposing that a presidential candidate must provide an "original long-form birth certificate from near the time of birth" to be eligible to be on the ballot. do you support this proposition?
Last edited by wrecking ball; 02-03-2011 at 11:10 PM..
it's 1993. 10 states are proposing that a presidential candidate must provide an "original long-form birth certificate from near the time of birth" to be eligible to be on the ballot. do you support this proposition?
The thing that is glaringly apparent is hussein obama's minions must feel strongly they have something to fear if these laws are passed.
Not even close.
What this demonstrates is that the Birther claims that they are "Constitutionalists" is a lie, and that it is the anti-Birthers who hold legitimate claim to that status. There is no 'fear" of these laws being passed, since their blatant unconstitutionality renders them effectually meaningless. They will ultimately be no more successful than any State's attempt to declare Scientology as the official religion of the US.
Most of us would have no problem with a state passing a "vetting" law if it could pass Constitutional muster. These laws however are a farce... as is the entire Birther movement.
I have proven my point with examples of real birth certificates. You're still just making stuff up.
I am content with that circumstance.
I'm not interested in the discussion of whose birth certificate says what.
I am interested in your opinion of how the full faith and credit clause applies here
B): proof that the candidate wasn't a duel citizen at the time of birth.
What about people like Senator McCain? Surely being born abroad while your father was serving his country shouldn't disqualify one from the office, even if he was also granted citizenship in the country of his birth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsldcd I think we have lost full faith and credit in our government.
Well, there you go. That comment is a rather dramatic demonstration that you have no idea what the full faith and credit clause of the constitution is, or what it means.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsldcd Obviously the left have no convidence hussein obama is a natural born citizen and will not be able to pass the smell test. EVERYONE should have to prove their status before being able to be president. I always assumed they were, silly me.
Yes. Silly you.
President Obama has provided more proof of his eligibility than any other president or presidential candidate in all of US history.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcsldcd Long form birth certificate, naming the time, weight, length, hospital, doctor, mother, father and all other info normally found on the long form.
I gotta tell you... I'm looking at my own "long form" at this moment... and it does not have length or weight on it.
In fact... I've never seen a State issued "long form" with that information on it. And as my family's historian... I just checked certificates from eight different states.
You really have no idea what the hell you are talking about.... do you?
I'm not interested in the discussion of whose birth certificate says what.
Okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet
I am interested in your opinion of how the full faith and credit clause applies here
Here is the full faith and credit clause from the US Constitution:
Quote:
Article IV
Section 1.
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
A state issued "short form" birth certificate is a "public record."
A state cannot demand a different certificate from the one that another state chooses to issue.
If Arizona wants a birth certificate, and Hawaii issues a COLB, then Arizona must accept that COLB as legal proof of the information it contains.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
