Is the jig up?

[macattak1]

No, you're attacking based on your disagreement, and you kust did it again, above. Who are you to make that determination? You're trying to discredit the Church that is known as God's Church. I'm no fan of my Church, but I certainly am no fan of your particular belief in regard to religion.

 

Please. Show me how I could have said it? What is your solution? How do I make statements about churches that question their behavior and rules. Behavior and rules that go against scripture. And Every church has behavior and rules that go against scripture. So please share with me how I should be doing it.

 

Please also address the other part of your complaint. Or have you now narrowed it down to just 1 point?

[macattak1]

No offense taken. No, I can't imagine what it's like to be a parent, closest I am is an uncle. That said, I know the difference between fathering a child, and having to have a court order to provide support, but still, in this jerk's own words, not be a dad, and actually being a Dad. This one jerk actually said that to me - "The court can make me pay, but no one is going to make be a Dad". And this asshole fathered two kids - with his now ex-wife, and within a few month, his now ex-girlfriend, who he was cheating on his wife with. And to this day, he is completely absent from their lives. He's not their dad, only biologically their father.

 

Thanks. Man, I feel sorry for those kids!

 

But is he not still their dad? Skip the dictionary definition. I know what you are trying to relate. And I agree to a certain extent. The point is well made. And I can see a kid saying something like "You are not my dad! You did not cloth me, feed me, help me, teach me, etc.!" So I get your point. Maybe we are just debating symantics now.

 

But not just any body can be a dad either. A woman can raise those kids for him. But that does not make her their dad. Dad is a male position. But more than that, it is that rotten guy that is their dad in the legal sense, the moral sense, etc. That he has failed in that duty and another is or could be filling may make that man a 'dad', but not the 'Dad'.

 

Any way, I am betting we both know pretty darn close to what the other is saying and feeling and why each of us has these positions. Its not that one of us must actually be right.

 

Peace and Blessings

[RangerM]

Retro-man, besides my friend from college, my wife and I know a couple of other women who have had abortions. Not only is it hard to imagine that they're living with this massive regret, one friend of my wife's gets particularly annoyed when it's suggested that she or other women who've had this procedure might be living with some regret.

If it means nothing to have had an abortion, or no more than having your tonsils taken out, then why be annoyed at all? Isn't it easier to simply disregard, than care what other people think?

Don't bet on that. I spoken to her many times, since then, and I can tell you that nothing would have been more cruel than to make her bear the child of her abuser, even if that child would have been put up for adoption. As men, it's hard for us to imagine what it's like to be repeatedly on the receiving end of a spouse's fist, or worse. That becomes especially true when the woman's experience with marital intimacy is more akin to spousal rape.

I don't bet on that. I wouldn't bet on that, regardless of whether I believe I'm right or not. Some things are better left alone.

 

However, as human beings we tend to not retain the pain of past physical injury as much as mental. Once the bruises have healed, the cries have stopped, and the anger has abated, all we have left is our memories and a sense of what may have been, what could be, and how things may have turned out differently.

 

Your friend's anger will ultimately subside. Her memory of the child that may have been, will be all that is left. Women (most women) think with their feelings, and regret has a way of resurfacing even if repressed. I'll believe that is a woman's role (or plight, depending upon your perspective) as long as I'm alive.

One principle I've lived by, since my mid teens, is that a male, I have zero business and zero right to tell any female what to do with her body, and even voice the opinion that she should carry a pregnancy to term if she doesn't want to.

If I am the father of that unborn child, I believe it is my right. I may not carry the child, but that does not make it any less mine, or my responsibility.

My basis for this has always been that since, as a male, I can't get pregnant, and furthermore as male I can walk away from my responsibilities after the fact of fathering a child (and even when, as a male, while I can be forced to take some financial responsibilities, I can't be forced to be a parent, to be a dad), then I shouldn't be telling women what they should do, in regards to their reproductive health.

Without trying to be cruel, I think it is unfortunate that you have no "fatherly tendencies". To me, it is unthinkable to walk away from my responsibilities as the father to a child.

 

I'm not saying you have to want to be a Dad, but to say (in essence) it's optional regardless of whether or not you sire an offspring gives me great pause. I just don't understand why a person would think that way.

[RangerM]

Which brings me to the last point: a fetus is not a human being. It is a potential human being. If it is aborted, it does not lose its life, because it has no life of its own: It has no friends, no memories, no desires, no dreams, no fears (not even of death), no conscious attachments to anything or anyone - only a physical attachment to the womb, gradually becoming sensate as months go by. It is incorrect to refer to this as "a person".

So when the fetus inside the womb reacts (and they do react) to the mother's voice, it has no conscience attachment to the mother? If not, then why is it that immediately after birth, the child reacts to the mother's voice so directly? Were you not in the room when your child was born? My daughters' reaction to my wife's voice was to stop crying. Yet, they have no foreknowledge of who she is, and (according to you) what her voice sounds like. This might be worth reading, if you're interested. It's an article on Fetal Psychology that appeared in Psychology Today in 1998.

 

I wonder when your wife told you she was pregnant whether you were happy or not. Given that pregnancy merely represents a potential child, as well as a potentially life-threatening condition for your wife, it would seem that you would be unhappy(?).

 

A child born at 3:00, was not a human being at 2:59, 2:30, or the day before? You and I will have to disagree on that.

Edited July 26, 2009 by RangerM

[Len_A]

Thanks. Man, I feel sorry for those kids!

 

But is he not still their dad? Skip the dictionary definition. I know what you are trying to relate. And I agree to a certain extent. The point is well made. And I can see a kid saying something like "You are not my dad! You did not cloth me, feed me, help me, teach me, etc.!" So I get your point. Maybe we are just debating symantics now.

 

But not just any body can be a dad either. A woman can raise those kids for him. But that does not make her their dad. Dad is a male position. But more than that, it is that rotten guy that is their dad in the legal sense, the moral sense, etc. That he has failed in that duty and another is or could be filling may make that man a 'dad', but not the 'Dad'.

 

Any way, I am betting we both know pretty darn close to what the other is saying and feeling and why each of us has these positions. Its not that one of us must actually be right.

 

Peace and Blessings

I think we're both in the same semantic area. Yea, the clown is their "dad" in the biological sense. No debate there. But in the sense of parenting, he's not their "Dad".

 

I think we're both right.

[Len_A]

Without trying to be cruel, I think it is unfortunate that you have no "fatherly tendencies".

 

I'm not saying you have to want to be a Dad, but to say (in essence) it's optional regardless of whether or not you sire an offspring gives me great pause. I just don't understand why a person would think that way.

Some of us aren't cut to to be parents, although I don't think that's my case. Mine was more a case of not wanting the responsibility, financially, because of a combination of series of employment problems, coupled with getting married a bit later in life than most. After a decade of busting my hump to build my sales territory, and using my former autoworker experience to help me understand my customers, the company I was working for at the time I got engaged, in September, 1993, closed down, and because of a change in purchasing policies at Ford and GM in same month, I wasn't able to keep both my territory and my income level intact. Four months prior to my company closing down, our CEO came to Detroit to assure us that the company was on tract, and during a lunch with all of us sales geeks, he made a comment that really turned me off - "I like married salesman, with families, because I can make them work harder." That never thrilled me.

 

Then, after the company closed down, and our parent company literally gave our office away to another distributor, a Battle Creek, MI company who wanted to make entry into the Detroit market, my "reward" in October, 1993, for transitioning my Ford contract, and 80% of the rest of my business, was a 45% pay cut, to the point where, without my soon-to-be wife's income, I could barely afford my house payments (and they weren't that high @ $725 a month). The infuriating irony is the same competitor sales people I spent ten years beating up on - the same level of business with their respective distributors would have meant a 25% pay INCREASE for me, but their sales managers and owners wouldn't agree to bring me on board unless I "shared" my business with the other sales people. Screw that. And the idiots that took over my sales office told me that my dissatisfaction with their pay structure came from my own former employment with Ford, my Dad and other members of my family's employment with the Detroit auto company, and "the bad influence of (my) auto industry customers". Their words.

 

And my pre-1993 income levels - I've only hit them three times since then, once with an employer in 1997, once in 1998, and then my last position that I was laid off from two years ago.

 

Long story short, there was no way I was ever going to afford to raise a family, and with me pushing 50 right now, I know we made the right decision. It's not that I don't like kids, but I'll be damned if I was going to take on a responsibility I knew I wasn't going to be able to meet.

 

At least I've never fathered a child and walked away, unfortunately like some people I know.

[RangerM]

Some of us aren't cut to to be parents, although I don't think that's my case. Mine was more a case of not wanting the responsibility, financially, because of a combination of series of employment problems, coupled with getting married a bit later in life than most.....

 

Long story short, there was no way I was ever going to afford to raise a family, and with me pushing 50 right now, I know we made the right decision. It's not that I don't like kids, but I'll be damned if I was going to take on a responsibility I knew I wasn't going to be able to meet.

 

At least I've never fathered a child and walked away, unfortunately like some people I know.

I can respect your position, and obviously you made the choices in life that you felt were best for you. From what I know of you (based on this, and other interactions we've had), you would likely have made a good father. Perhaps, you can be the doting uncle.

[Len_A]

I can respect your position, and obviously you made the choices in life that you felt were best for you. From what I know of you (based on this, and other interactions we've had), you would likely have made a good father. Perhaps, you can be the doting uncle.

My wife agrees with you. So does my niece. My nieghbors have said, based on the way I take care of our dog (a now thirteen year old Shih Tzu, who attracts kids like crazy) and the interaction with the neighborhood kids when I walk him (daily), have said similar things. I like most kids - it's some of the parents I don't necessarily like, but that's a topic for another discussion.

[xr7g428]

Retroman: Whoa whoa whoa! Hey! I just finished up a couple of strips of bacon here in my suburban house, that I commute to in my Thunderbird - so don't presume to tell me what I am trying to push on everybody. I have time and time and time again on this site lamented the collapse of the middle class, and the forcing of all of us into REIT-owned apartment complexes and cheap foreign made automobiles (which changes come from right wing policies favoring the export of jobs to cheap wage countries and the concentration of wealth at the top).

 

Retro, Do you really believe that the problem with the USA is that the rich are not taxed enough? As the owner of a US based manufacturing company, I can tell you first hand that the policies that make us consider outsourcing are not "right wing". Here is what pushes us out the door: We manufacture wood products. That means we make saw dust. New rules for particulate emissions mean that we have to find a way to measure and control the saw dust like never before. There is no evidence that our saw dust ever caused harm to anyone. But a new regulation means we may have to close. We have a regulation, but no technology to meet the regulation, and no way to determine if we have met it or not. I am sure to you this is worthwhile environmental protection, and who knows, it might be. But don't complain if we send the jobs somewhere else. Then there are all of the employee costs. We have been reported twice to OSHA by the same employee. First she claimed that a printer was too close to her desk and the noise it made was damaging her hearing. the result of the tests that we had to pay for: less than 72dB, no risk. Then she reported us as improperly dispensing medications. This meant that we had to through out the bottle of Tylenol in the break room cabinet because the pills were not individually wrapped. But after two reports to OSHA, we hit the black list and they came on to do a complete audit. Do you think we could fire her? Do you think she knew that we couldn't? Do you think she did any work after that? If you make employees more expensive, we will either have to have fewer of them, or close up shop entirely.

[Len_A]

Retro, Do you really believe that the problem with the USA is that the rich are not taxed enough? As the owner of a US based manufacturing company, I can tell you first hand that the policies that make us consider outsourcing are not "right wing". Here is what pushes us out the door: We manufacture wood products. That means we make saw dust. New rules for particulate emissions mean that we have to find a way to measure and control the saw dust like never before. There is no evidence that our saw dust ever caused harm to anyone. But a new regulation means we may have to close. We have a regulation, but no technology to meet the regulation, and no way to determine if we have met it or not. I am sure to you this is worthwhile environmental protection, and who knows, it might be. But don't complain if we send the jobs somewhere else. Then there are all of the employee costs. We have been reported twice to OSHA by the same employee. First she claimed that a printer was too close to her desk and the noise it made was damaging her hearing. the result of the tests that we had to pay for: less than 72dB, no risk. Then she reported us as improperly dispensing medications. This meant that we had to through out the bottle of Tylenol in the break room cabinet because the pills were not individually wrapped. But after two reports to OSHA, we hit the black list and they came on to do a complete audit. Do you think we could fire her? Do you think she knew that we couldn't? Do you think she did any work after that? If you make employees more expensive, we will either have to have fewer of them, or close up shop entirely.

You may want to consult with a labor law attorney, and see what your rights as an employer are. Under "normal" circumstances, and I'm assuming she's an at-will employee, you could fire her ass, no questions asked. The fact that she reported your firm to OSHA, however, is probably covered under the whistle-blower laws, so tread carefully. I say this as someone who has been on the receiving end of at-will employment, and knowing that under ordinary ciurcumstance, as an employee, I had zip rights.

 

If it were me, I'd weight to probably costs of firing her ass, and perform a cost-benefit analysis... and fire her anyway.

[xr7g428]

We couldn't dream of firing her. What we did do was find her a "better" job with another company. If they chose to fire her, she won't have whistle blower status. Honestly, she wasn't a bad employee until her no account boy friend put her up to all of this.

 

I could go on and on about workers comp claims, my favorite was when one employee could not make the hearing because he had injured himself water skiing the day before. We still lost. His health at the time of hearing was considered inadmissible. He claimed a miraculous recovery, and then told us all that he was so drunk he didn't remember going skiing.

[macattak1]

Retro, Do you really believe that the problem with the USA is that the rich are not taxed enough? As the owner of a US based manufacturing company, I can tell you first hand that the policies that make us consider outsourcing are not "right wing". Here is what pushes us out the door: We manufacture wood products. That means we make saw dust. New rules for particulate emissions mean that we have to find a way to measure and control the saw dust like never before. There is no evidence that our saw dust ever caused harm to anyone. But a new regulation means we may have to close. We have a regulation, but no technology to meet the regulation, and no way to determine if we have met it or not. I am sure to you this is worthwhile environmental protection, and who knows, it might be. But don't complain if we send the jobs somewhere else. Then there are all of the employee costs. We have been reported twice to OSHA by the same employee. First she claimed that a printer was too close to her desk and the noise it made was damaging her hearing. the result of the tests that we had to pay for: less than 72dB, no risk. Then she reported us as improperly dispensing medications. This meant that we had to through out the bottle of Tylenol in the break room cabinet because the pills were not individually wrapped. But after two reports to OSHA, we hit the black list and they came on to do a complete audit. Do you think we could fire her? Do you think she knew that we couldn't? Do you think she did any work after that? If you make employees more expensive, we will either have to have fewer of them, or close up shop entirely.

 

Pay her $2500 to just leave? This is the kind of stuff that scares me. I am at the very tail end of my business plan. I don't want to have to endure horrible mgmt or employees!

 

Peace and Blessings

[retro-man]

Retro, Do you really believe that the problem with the USA is that the rich are not taxed enough? As the owner of a US based manufacturing company, I can tell you first hand that the policies that make us consider outsourcing are not "right wing". Here is what pushes us out the door: We manufacture wood products. That means we make saw dust. New rules for particulate emissions mean that we have to find a way to measure and control the saw dust like never before. There is no evidence that our saw dust ever caused harm to anyone. But a new regulation means we may have to close. We have a regulation, but no technology to meet the regulation, and no way to determine if we have met it or not. I am sure to you this is worthwhile environmental protection, and who knows, it might be. But don't complain if we send the jobs somewhere else. Then there are all of the employee costs. We have been reported twice to OSHA by the same employee. First she claimed that a printer was too close to her desk and the noise it made was damaging her hearing. the result of the tests that we had to pay for: less than 72dB, no risk. Then she reported us as improperly dispensing medications. This meant that we had to through out the bottle of Tylenol in the break room cabinet because the pills were not individually wrapped. But after two reports to OSHA, we hit the black list and they came on to do a complete audit. Do you think we could fire her? Do you think she knew that we couldn't? Do you think she did any work after that? If you make employees more expensive, we will either have to have fewer of them, or close up shop entirely.

I don't know if the rich are taxed enough - or if anybody else is. I know a few things:

- I know we are taxed less than what our government is currently spending.

- I expect to pay about 1/3 of my income in taxes of one sort or another in any given year. This has not changed much in the past 30 years despite a rhetorical crescendo to the contrary.

- On the website of The Tax Foundation, a tax watchdog group, who publicizes "Tax Freedom Day", you can see that "Tax Freedom Day" arrived on April 13th this year, 2 days later than it did in 1960, and earlier than it did in 1970. I am aware of the limitations of the data and methodology, so don't go mining for them - but the basic fact remains - our collective tax burden is not much different as a percentage of our collective income than it was one or two generations ago.

- Corporate tax rates and top individual tax rates are lower now than they were in the 1950s.

- Against this backdrop, there is an exponentially growing income inequality.

So, make of all that what you will. You know what I make of it.

 

Regarding environmental protections: it is often said on here - from the right - that we live in a country so prosperous that our poorest wear Nike shoes and have a weight problem. We are also prosperous enough to pay for a clean environment. Regulations are often criticized as excessive in view of the fact that we "already" have "clean air" and "clean water". Anyone my age remembers well that American industry was dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age of environmental protections, and with the same dire warnings of economic ruin. Which is not to say the regulations you are facing are not excessive. They may well be. You will recall my position on foreign competition though: make them live up to our standards, rather than us living down to theirs. We have a very detailed tariff structure in place, one that categorizes all manner of manufactured and raw goods. We should set a baseline for environmental and labor standards, calculate the economic impact on each category of goods, and tax them accordingly. When a country imposed labor or environmental standards equal to or exceeding ours in the production of these goods, they can petition to have that tariff removed. A level playing field, at a high level. That is common sense to me. But others will come on here and scream "Smoot Hawley this and Great Depression that, blah blah yadda yadda!!" And so we have the race to the bottom.

 

As for the troublesome employee, you have my sympathy. There are, unfortunately, a lot of parasites in the system, with probably too many protections. While unfortunate, a layoff could provide you with plausible deniability.

 

By the way, what does your company make? In one of my past lives, I was a furniture maker. I know from sawdust. Used to pull presto logs out of my nose every night.

Edited July 27, 2009 by retro-man

[retro-man]

So when the fetus inside the womb reacts (and they do react) to the mother's voice, it has no conscience attachment to the mother? If not, then why is it that immediately after birth, the child reacts to the mother's voice so directly? Were you not in the room when your child was born? My daughters' reaction to my wife's voice was to stop crying. Yet, they have no foreknowledge of who she is, and (according to you) what her voice sounds like. This might be worth reading, if you're interested. It's an article on Fetal Psychology that appeared in Psychology Today in 1998.

 

I wonder when your wife told you she was pregnant whether you were happy or not. Given that pregnancy merely represents a potential child, as well as a potentially life-threatening condition for your wife, it would seem that you would be unhappy(?).

 

A child born at 3:00, was not a human being at 2:59, 2:30, or the day before? You and I will have to disagree on that.

We will have to disagree on that. Personally - and this is coming from someone who has not made this the central issue of my existence - I think abortions should be available for any reason, or no reason at all, during the 1st trimester. Third trimester, save the life or health of the mother only. 2nd trimester ..... I don't know.

 

In terms of human psychology, a lot of behaviors are hard-wired in. My oldest son is not only a talented artist like my father was, but he has the exact same drawing hand: his linework is in the same, very individual style, with the same identifying quirks, as that of my father, who died 4 years before my son was born. This is something that you would think to be quite a high function, and yet there is evidence, to me anyway, that it is simply hard-wired in. As a matter of fact, his handwriting is also virtually indistinguishable from my father's. It is quite uncanny. (He looks quite a bit like him too.) Studies of adopted children have shown that those who have at least one natural parent in prison - even though they have never seen them - are 5 times as likely to be incarcerated themselves as those who don't.

 

At any age, the line between instinctive behavior - reflex - and higher consciousness seems to be very blurry. Psychologists are in general agreement that humans do not develop an awareness of themselves as distinct from their surroundings - self awareness, ego, higher consciousness - until sometime between 18 months and 3 years of age depending on the individual. Reflex, instinct, yes - so attachment in that sense, probably from the very first, including in the womb - but not higher consciousness.

 

When my wife was pregnant, I was very happy. It was a planned pregnancy, a wanted pregnancy, and we were both anticipating having children. A few of my co-workers have experienced miscarriages, and all of the disappointment, sadness, and even guilt, that goes with that. What kind of psychological burden shall we heap on them, with this ardent full-court press to elevate the fetus to full human status? Shall we exaggerate their loss to even greater proportions than it already is? Shall we make them accessories to manslaughter while we are at it? "If only you had lain flat on your back for nine months this wouldn't have happened".....

 

At least we got the thread off the topic of Obama's birth for a moment. :D

Edited July 27, 2009 by retro-man

[RangerM]

.....this is coming from someone who has not made this the central issue of my existence...

No one ever does by choice. I don't consider it my business what you believe, however when you make a blanket statement like "a fetus is not a human being.....", I feel compelled by my own sense of right and wrong to speak up. That is drastically different than saying I want to put a woman in shackles to force her to have a child against her will. I prefer to stay out of it. BUT, I will not remain silent when a person promotes the type of thinking that would allow any persons to ignore the truth regarding whether or not a fetus "feels".

In terms of human psychology, a lot of behaviors are hard-wired in......

I would not disagree with that, except to say that our humanity allows us to leap beyond our genetic and/or environmental influences. Some might say it's human evolution, and to some extent they'd be right, however evolution is genetically-based and those "leaps" are not passed down by genetics. They come from another source.

 

At any age, the line between instinctive behavior - reflex - and higher consciousness seems to be very blurry. Psychologists are in general agreement that humans do not develop an awareness of themselves as distinct from their surroundings - self awareness, ego, higher consciousness - until sometime between 18 months and 3 years of age depending on the individual. Reflex, instinct, yes - so attachment in that sense, probably from the very first, including in the womb - but not higher consciousness.

In your post above, you said a fetus has no memories. Now you have augmented your statement to allow for the possibility of attachment albeit out of instinct or reflex. I ask you take it one step further. The link I provided described that a newborn recognizes not only voices, but specific voices. While this doesn't mean that the child has learned language, he/she is capable of distinguishing between the mother's voice and others even while inside the womb. The ability to distinguish between voices is more than mere reflex.

When my wife was pregnant, I was very happy. It was a planned pregnancy, a wanted pregnancy, and we were both anticipating having children. A few of my co-workers have experienced miscarriages, and all of the disappointment, sadness, and even guilt, that goes with that. What kind of psychological burden shall we heap on them, with this ardent full-court press to elevate the fetus to full human status? Shall we exaggerate their loss to even greater proportions than it already is?

Should the loss of a pregnancy carry less pain than the loss of a newborn? I can't speak for a mother who's had a miscarriage or lost a baby, but I certainly know we should not diminish its importance to her. Your affording lesser status of the victim of a miscarriage sounds like a coping mechanism.

Shall we make them accessories to manslaughter while we are at it? "If only you had lain flat on your back for nine months this wouldn't have happened".....

If an offender murders a pregnant woman, did he/she kill one or two persons? How about if the woman was due the next week?

At least we got the thread off the topic of Obama's birth for a moment. :D

Thankfully.

Edited July 27, 2009 by RangerM

[retro-man]

In your post above, you said a fetus has no memories. Now you have augmented your statement to allow for the possibility of attachment albeit out of instinct or reflex. I ask you take it one step further. The link I provided described that a newborn recognizes not only voices, but specific voices. While this doesn't mean that the child has learned language, he/she is capable of distinguishing between the mother's voice and others even while inside the womb. The ability to distinguish between voices is more than mere reflex.

 

Its wiring, if you will, is formed while listening to the one voice closest and most constantly with it. Lay your head on your wife's stomach and listen as she speaks to how her voice resonates through her body. This preference for the mother's voice is no mystery.

[RangerM]

Lay your head on your wife's stomach and listen as she speaks to how her voice resonates through her body. This preference for the mother's voice is no mystery.

And that explains how the baby has the same reaction to the mother after birth? Do an experiment. Put your fingers in your ears and speak. Now record your voice on tape and listen to that. Notice a difference? The first step would approximate what your voice would sound like to a fetus. The second to a baby. You are able to distinguish, because you are able to comprehend the difference. So is the baby.

Its wiring, if you will, is formed while listening to the one voice closest and most constantly with it.

Hey, if it makes you feel better to believe that there's nothing in there but amniotic fluid and a foreign (to the mother) body of cells, believe what you want. I've been saying that all along.

Edited August 2, 2009 by RangerM

[sprinter]

The latest on the Obama birth certification. It seems like one has been found in Kenya and is awaiting authentication. The saga continues.

 

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764

[macattak1]

Well, I can say it looks about 10x more authentic than the junk Obama posted.

 

Imagine, an ex soviet block citizen schooling us Americans on how to protect our constitution...

 

Peace and Blessings

[suv_guy_19]

Yes, it's best we believe this paper than the official document of Hawaii, the Hawaii department of records, and the news paper clippings announcing his birth......get real.

[sprinter]

Yes, it's best we believe this paper than the official document of Hawaii, the Hawaii department of records, and the news paper clippings announcing his birth......get real.

 

 

The Hawaii documents are a Certification of Live Birth which could have easily been obtained by his grand parents as per the laws in Hawaii. If indeed he was born in Hawaii, why doesn't the shyster show us his long form birth certificate? That would put this all to rest. Get ready for President Biden.

[sprinter]

Yes, it's best we believe this paper than the official document of Hawaii, the Hawaii department of records, and the news paper clippings announcing his birth......get real.

 

But why does Hawaii refuse to declare your so called "official" document as real?

 

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105817

 

In response to a direct question from WND, the Hawaii Department of Health refused to authenticate either of the two versions of President Obama's short-form Certificate of Live Birth, or COLB, posted online – neither the image produced by the Obama campaign nor the images released by FactCheck.org.

 

Janice Okubo, the public information officer for the Hawaii DOH, also had no explanation for why Dr. Chiyome Fukino's initial press release last October and subsequent press release last week also avoided declaring the posted images to be of authentic documents.

[suv_guy_19]

Why is this still even a question? A certificate of live birth is the only thing issued by Hawaii now. All other records are electronic and are not to be released. You guys are making yourselves look like wing nuts.

09_063.pdf

[RaZor]

The latest on the Obama birth certification. It seems like one has been found in Kenya and is awaiting authentication. The saga continues.

 

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105764

LINK

[retro-man]

Get ready for President Biden.

Do me a personal favor - and I mean this with the utmost sincerity: hold your breath until that day comes, ok?