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.
Explaining whether or not your penis has had a "haircut" is indeed describing it. Would I be able to pick it out from a lineup based on that? Probably not. If I say my hair is long or short, I am describing it. I am not sure what you think circumcision is.
Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Really, so handing over my birth certificate is the same thing as describing the birthing process?
Cause thast basically what you are saying..........
My whole point is the way this is representd as "Describing your penis" Is inflammatory and inaccurate ,
But hey, youre a liberal , so that makes it ok, if it comes from YOUR side lol...........
ive proven my point, and im done here
Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Sinnthia
really...........does this bill require the person to tell the person questioning them , how the procedure was done?
Or does it just say they hand them their certificate of circumcision?
Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Its not stupid.........
I agree its rediculous to have this as a method to check for ANYTHING........
However, I believe that its not stupid at all to point on the inflammatory and incorrect language of the extremely bias website that you posted and what was originally the name of this thread
Point proven, YOU wont answer the question on my above post..........
I rest my case
Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
ive proven my point, and im done here
You cannot explain to me how handing over a paper describing your penis is not a descripition.
Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
ahh pretty simple, same reason you didnt think handing over your birth certificate was a description....
Youre being willfully ignorant of the fact that the whole language on that site and the original thread title were meant to be inflammatory and inaccurate
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) indicated that she may not sign the recently passed "birther" bill into law, explaining that "I think my big concern probably, just shooting a little bit from the hip, is the fact that I don't know if we regulate federal elections."
The final piece of the puzzle which Doug examines is much harder to get around, were one inclined to try, and invokes the Full Faith and Credit clause (FF&C) of the constitution.
Section 1 of Article IV of the Constitution requires states to give full faith and credit to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. This includes accepting as genuine records from a sister state that have been officially certified under seal from the appropriate record keeper. Under Arizona’s law, the Hawaii Certification Of Live Birth, which is an official document from the State of Hawaii, and the only birth record that the state releases. By failing to accept this document, even for the limited purpose that this law is written for, Arizona would be failing to give full faith and credit to the records of not just Hawaii, but every other state that only issues COLB’s as birth records.
As for her decision to veto this bill, Gov. Brewer said in part: "I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for President of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth to submit their 'early baptismal or circumcision certificates'… this is a bridge too far. This measure creates significant new problems while failing to do anything constructive for Arizona."
Originally posted by RoguePhilosopher
There are problems ahead for Obama. Wait and see!
Originally posted by nanny
I don't really know why I read this thread, I haven't really taken much notice of Obama,me being British but I dont really think he would have one of those certificates from birth, If he is not Jewish as If i'm right ( don't hold me to it) muslems get it done when they are older.