It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

AZ Birther Bill accepts Circumcision Certificate even though it is not a legal document.

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
I seriously do not want to know anything about the President's penis nor any member of Congress and think we already heard enough about Presidential "members" with Clinton. It begs the question though, wouldn't this criteria discriminate against women? You all know, don't you that this AZ bill isn't going to fly, right? It's very unlikely Gov. Brewer will sign it and she has recently expressed grave reservations about it. Business leaders in Arizona are getting really tired of this nonsense in the Arizona legislature as it is really costing them money not just in appeals but in tourist dollars.




posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
My question is what alternative form of identification can female presidential candidates present that is equivalent to a circumcision certificate. Or is this birther bill gender bias?



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
since you gave us a recap of the birther movement, I'll give you a recap of the Obama deception movement

You liberals believed Obama's birth certificate was legitimate because a website called "factcheck" .org verified it. You assumed the website was legitimate because why would an organization call themselves factcheck if they didn't actually do factchecking, it's not like liberals are capable of lying, only conservative tea party Republican Koch brothers can do that. You still trusted the document even though factcheck.org was funded by the Annenberg foundation of which Obama was a chairman on. You continued to trust the document when it was revealed that his sister had the same birth certificate even though she was born in Indonesia. You liberals continued to say that Obama showed the birth certificate and anyone who denies this is racist. It was then revealed that a long form birth certificate was on file, and the governor of Hawaii vowed to find it to put the birther issue to rest, but he couldn't find it, but you continued to trust the president and changed tactics by saying that there was a long form birth certificate but it wasn't necessary because the short form is sufficient. Then it was revealed that Obama is using a fake social security number but you laugh this off as ridiculous because that would imply Obama is guilty of a federal crime which goes against the sacred logic that the messiah can not be guilty of any wrong doing, doing so means you are racist.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
It seems like this bill violates the first amendment, by making a law respecting an organization of religion. Since circumcision is a religious ritual (having no scientific merit) it seems like people who are religiously circumcised can now have an unfair shot at the presidency simply by being circumcised as opposed to being born in the country. All the more reason to assume this bill was watered down. It's also funny to point out that liberals thought this bill was racist but now it will help ensure that candidates are not natural born Americans.
edit on 17-4-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
It's also funny to point out that liberals thought this bill was racist but now it will help ensure that candidates are not natural born Americans.


I don't think anyone, liberal or otherwise, thought the wording of the bill would be racist. The notion of racism related to this bill stems from the motivation behind the legislation.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
You liberals believed Obama's birth certificate was legitimate because a website called "factcheck" .org verified it.
You’re wrong from the start.

Reasonable people believe the birth certificate is legitimate not only because multiple fact checking organizations have checked the certificate, one of them being factcheck.org, but because the authorities of the state of Hawaii, the Department of Health and even the Republican governor, confirmed it was legitimate and Obama was born in Hawaii.


You continued to trust the document when it was revealed that his sister had the same birth certificate even though she was born in Indonesia.
So?

‘Birther’ Movement Dogs Republicans

“It’s crazy,” said Janice Okubo, director of communications for the Hawaii Department of Health. “I don’t think anything is ever going to satisfy them.” Okubo, who said that she gets weekly questions from Obama ‘Birthers’ that are “more like threats,” explained that the certificate of live birth reproduced by Obama’s campaign should have debunked the conspiracy theories.

“If you were born in Bali, for example,” Okubo explained, “you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate. But it’s become very clear that it doesn’t matter what I say. The people who are questioning this bring up all these implausible scenarios.

Do you have any evidence Obama’s sister’s birth certificate says she was born in Hawaii? Any at all?


It was then revealed that a long form birth certificate was on file, and the governor of Hawaii vowed to find it to put the birther issue to rest, but he couldn't find it
'This is a collaborative endeavor'

Q: You stirred up quite a controversy with your comments regarding birthers and your plans to release more information regarding President Barack Obama's birth certificate. How is that coming?

A: I got a letter from someone the other day who was genuinely concerned about it; it is not all just political agenda. They were talking on Olelo last night about this; it has a political implication for 2012 that we simply cannot have.

(Abercrombie said there is a recording of the birth in the State Archives and he wants to use that.)

It was actually written I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down ...


...What I can do, and all I have ever said, is that I am going to see to it as governor that I can verify to anyone who is honest about it that this is the case. If there is a political agenda then there is nothing I can do about that, nor can the president.


Then it was revealed that Obama is using a fake social security number but you laugh this off as ridiculous because
... because, like all the other claims you have just made, there’s not a shred of evidence it is true.



edit on 17-4-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man

Originally posted by filosophia
It's also funny to point out that liberals thought this bill was racist but now it will help ensure that candidates are not natural born Americans.


I don't think anyone, liberal or otherwise, thought the wording of the bill would be racist. The notion of racism related to this bill stems from the motivation behind the legislation.


How can you say the motivation behind the legislation is racist if the bill itself isn't racist? That seems like an unfair prejudice against the legislators. Even if they were racist they managed to keep their racism out of the bill, so much so that they are now helping Obama



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


Seems like no matter what you just won't believe what the republicans are saying, maybe you're racist against white people.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by aptness

Then it was revealed that Obama is using a fake social security number but you laugh this off as ridiculous because...


because, like all the other claims you have just made, there’s not a shred of evidence it is true.



edit on 17-4-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)


That was sort of weak, can you maybe debunk this claim with a little bit more evidence? I sort of see this as just dismissing the issue without really backing up your reason as to why the social security issue is just made up information.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
How can you say the motivation behind the legislation is racist if the bill itself isn't racist? That seems like an unfair prejudice against the legislators. Even if they were racist they managed to keep their racism out of the bill, so much so that they are now helping Obama
You may, like the Arizona legislators, pretend this bill wasn’t tailored to target Obama, but let me ask you something.

Why does the bill leave out a US passport as acceptable documentation when it’s one of the more widely accepted forms of proof of citizenship in the United States, and yet it accepts an “early baptismal or circumcision certificate”?

So, two of the more widely accepted forms of proof of citizenship used in the United States, short form birth certificate and US passport, are absent from the bill, suspiciously, the two documents everyone knows Obama has.

Edit: The Arizona bill also only imposes the documentation requirement for the Presidential candidate, but not the Vice-Presidential candidate. Why? Do you think the Vice-President doesn’t have the same constitutional requirements of age and natural born citizenship status as the President?



Seems like no matter what you just won't believe what the republicans are saying, maybe you're racist against white people.
Which Republicans would that be? Did you just claim the birthers are Republicans?



That was sort of weak, can you maybe debunk this claim with a little bit more evidence?
I will gladly address the SSN claim... once you back up any of your claims. We can start with Obama’s sister’s birth certificate. Let me know when you confirm her birth certificate says she was born in Hawaii and present the evidence to back it up.



edit on 17-4-2011 by aptness because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


How is the bill tailored to target Obama? Unless Obama is not circumcised. What does the short form or the passport have to do with anything if he can get by with his you know what.

We are talking about a bill that allows someone who was circumcised to be president, which could include any foreigner not born in the country, and then you ask me why it makes sense for them to not allow passports? The bill doesn't make sense. It was obviously watered down or subverted, or meant to fail from the beginning. I'm not backing the bill if you assumed that, I think it's ridiculous.

And you're right, birthers are not just republicans, they are independents, democrats, well a large segment of the population, but however many there are, it's no importance to Mr. Transparency. He's satisfied with the document he already revealed so he is making a point by ignoring the "crazies" rather than catering to them. We'll see how that turns out for him when election time comes around.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
The bill doesn't make sense.
And they said we could never agree on anything



It was obviously watered down or subverted, or meant to fail from the beginning. I'm not backing the bill if you assumed that, I think it's ridiculous.
Ha! The “bill doesn’t make sense” ... because it’s part of a conspiracy. OK. That’s where you lost me.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 



No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.


This would indicate that if the Vice president were to become president following a president's death, then he would have to be a natural born citizen, but it doesn't say anything about the vice president having to be a citizen prior to being president, I agree it would make sense for that to happen but with all legal documents there are loop holes the size of galaxies.

It's not posted if his sister's birth certificate says she was born in Hawaii, but neither can you show me that it says she was born in Indonesia, as there are no copies of it available. That may be a false claim as there have no doubt been attempts at discrediting the birther issue but that doesn't mean all the claims are automatically wrong just because the pot was poisoned. So, about the social security issue?



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Geez.

Not only do I not have my original birth certificate, I am also uncircumsized.

Now I'll never be President.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by filosophia
The bill doesn't make sense.
And they said we could never agree on anything



It was obviously watered down or subverted, or meant to fail from the beginning. I'm not backing the bill if you assumed that, I think it's ridiculous.
Ha! The “bill doesn’t make sense” ... because it’s part of a conspiracy. OK. That’s where you lost me.


You've must have heard of congressman watering a bill down before, where you get off calling me a conspiracy theorist for saying this is beyond me and it's rather amusing. Isn't the "birther movement" a giant conspiracy to remove the president from office? Oh wait, conspiracies don't exist, so I guess not.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by aptness

Originally posted by filosophia
The bill doesn't make sense.
And they said we could never agree on anything


Who said that? I agree with you that the sister's claim is not legitimate, but that's really the only issue you proved me wrong on. I still know that Obama was a chairman of the Annenberg foundation which funds factcheck.org so in my opinion his short form birth certificate can not be trusted.

edit on 17-4-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by WildWorld
Don't some men get the circumcision as adults? They could come to the US at any time, get circumcised, and that is their proof of citizenship?? Crazy.
This will be abused.
edit on 15-4-2011 by WildWorld because: (no reason given)


considering what they did wouldn't stand up in any court outside arizona...this state has become the "kook cove" of the U.S....what i'm worried about is that there are plenty of people that don't see this as bizarre, and to me that means that more extreme nutty stuff is just around the corner.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
This would indicate that if the Vice president were to become president following a president's death, then he would have to be a natural born citizen, but it doesn't say anything about the vice president having to be a citizen prior to being president
How can one be a natural born citizen and not a citizen?


I agree it would make sense for that to happen but with all legal documents there are loop holes the size of galaxies.
Really? That’s your position in regards to the United States Constitution? “With all legal documents there are loop holes the size of galaxies”?

Except with Obama, right? Then, when it’s about Obama, there must be no loopholes, otherwise we have an usurper in office.


It's not posted if his sister's birth certificate says she was born in Hawaii, but neither can you show me that it says she was born in Indonesia
I don’t have to. You’re the one raising questions about Obama’s sister’s birth certificate, and secondly, her birther certificate is irrelevant to the question of Obama’s eligibility.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
What makes this bill completely idiotic is that it will accept "identity documents" like baptismal records or "circumcision certificates" that are simple non-government documents that anyone could easily forge. These are maintained by Churches or Temples, not government institutions. They'll even accept a "postpartum medical record" as signed by a midwife or "the person who examined the child after birth". That could even be a cab driver for all we know.


1. A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE'S LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE THAT INCLUDES AT LEAST THE DATE AND PLACE OF BIRTH, THE NAMES OF THE HOSPITAL AND THE ATTENDING PHYSICIAN, IF APPLICABLE, AND SIGNATURES OF ANY WITNESSES IN ATTENDANCE. IF THE CANDIDATE DOES NOT POSSESS A LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE AS REQUIRED BY THIS PARAGRAPH, THE CANDIDATE MAY ATTACH TWO OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS THAT SHALL TAKE THE PLACE OF THE LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE IF THE CANDIDATE SWEARS TO THEIR AUTHENTICITY AND VALIDITY AND THE DOCUMENTS CONTAIN ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO DETERMINE IF THE CANDIDATE MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS PRESCRIBED IN ARTICLE II, SECTION 1, CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES:
(a) EARLY BAPTISMAL OR CIRCUMCISION CERTIFICATE.
(b) HOSPITAL BIRTH RECORD.
(c) POSTPARTUM MEDICAL RECORD FOR THE MOTHER OR CHILD SIGNED BY THE DOCTOR OR MIDWIFE OR THE PERSON WHO DELIVERED OR EXAMINED THE CHILD AFTER BIRTH.
(d) ) EARLY CENSUS RECORD.


Picture of a circumcision certificate (available at your local Office Max or Copy Center):

Heck you could probably download a template from the internet and print your own... All you need is a Mohel to sign it, and we all know they represent the highest order of government officialdom - much more so than, say, the Governor of the State of Hawaii who has certified Obama's BC.

Leave it up to the GOP, they are obsessed with what goes on in the bedroom and the male penis!

I thought the GOP was the party of fiscal responsibility, yet here they are wasting time and money getting garbage like this passed.



posted on Apr, 17 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by aptness
 


I'm just quoting the constitution, I didn't write it.

Yes, that is my position, it is a loop hole, kind of like how the Bush administration says it is constitutional to torture prisoners, it's a giant loop hole. There are many things good about the constitution, such as the bill of rights, keeping the gold and silver as only legal tender, but this is subverted by the very government that claims to be doing things in the name of the constitution. I'd call that a significant loop hole.

Why should it differ for Obama? I never said it should. I said multiple times that the birth issue is a side note considering the constitution is null and void. The rule of law is ignored when it is convenient for them. Obama has many levels of distrust surrounding him, not just the birth issue. He broke just about all of his promises and so why should I expect this one issue, which is the crux and most important issue of all, to be an honest one?

Technically, shouldn't Obama be the one to prove his claims? Oh that's right, the Annenberg foundation said it's okay.
edit on 17-4-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join