Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

[Loss Leader]

So Bob why would you refuse to do this? Wouldn't this prove your case?

It's really a very reasonable request. You say something is possible, everyone else says it's impossible. What better way is there to prove that it could be done than for you to do it? Go down and try to see your original birth record.

 

[JayUtah]

"A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant" (may view the birth certificate) -- Robert Prey's misleading rewording of Hawaii law

FTFY.

Deal with it.

I don't have to. The Hawaii courts already have, ruling explicitly and specifically that your interpretation of this law is incorrect.

There is no provision in Hawaii law for any person to access his original birth certificate, nor any obligation on the Dept. of Health's part to allow it. That is a fact, and that fact has been explicitly attested to by the Hawaii judiciary, in those words.

Please tell the world why the personal interpretation of Robert Prey should be given more weight than that of the courts of Hawaii.

 

[phunk]

"A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant" (may view the birth certificate) -- Hawaii law. Deal with it.

Please quote the whole thing.

 

[Mojo]

"A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant" (may view the birth certificate) -- Hawaii law. Deal with it.

Please quote the whole thing.

To give you a little assistance, Robert, Here's the law in question:

The 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. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:

...

(7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;

Does it say that they may view the birth certificate, or any other public health statistics records?

Hint: does it specify who gets to inspect the records and issue certified copies of them?

 

[Hans]

It's really a very reasonable request. You say something is possible, everyone else says it's impossible. What better way is there to prove that it could be done than for you to do it? Go down and try to see your original birth record.

Even better for someone in Hawaii to authorize him to view their original BC

Will that happen? Nope

 

[LSSBB]

"A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant" (may view the birth certificate) -- Hawaii law. Deal with it.

Original or Certified Copy? Deal with the question.

 

[Robert Prey]

To give you a little assistance, Robert, Here's the law in question:




Does it say that they may view the birth certificate, or any other public health statistics records?

Hint: does it specify who gets to inspect the records and issue certified copies of them?

Yes, and yes. "Inspect" means view. Obviously. And the person is designated by the registrant.

 

[Robert Prey]

FTFY.



I don't have to. The Hawaii courts already have, ruling explicitly and specifically that your interpretation of this law is incorrect.

There is no provision in Hawaii law for any person to access his original birth certificate, nor any obligation on the Dept. of Health's part to allow it. That is a fact, and that fact has been explicitly attested to by the Hawaii judiciary, in those words.

Please tell the world why the personal interpretation of Robert Prey should be given more weight than that of the courts of Hawaii.

Hawaii law speaks for itself as do your continued mis-quotes and interpolations.

 

[Loss Leader]

Yes, and yes. "Inspect" means view. Obviously. And the person is designated by the registrant.

It's not obvious. Why don't you try to view your own original birth record to show how obvious the whole thing is?

 

[Mojo]

Yes, and yes. "Inspect" means view. Obviously. And the person is designated by the registrant.

The "person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant" is the entity applying to have the records inspected. That is what they are "designated by the registrant" to do.

The law doesn't give them the right to inspect the records. It is a prohibition, not a declaration of right. What it does is to forbid anyone to be permitted to inspect the records unless the department is satisfied that the applicant has a valid interest in the record, (that's what "the 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" means) then lists those classes of applicant who are deemed to have such an interest. It says nothing at all about the applicant being allowed to inspect the record themselves. It is the staff of the department, not the applicant, who inspect the records and issue certified copies.

 

[Dcdrac]

Mr Prey the challenge to you is try and view your own original,not a copy, birth certficate

 

[Border Reiver]

Hawaii law speaks for itself as do your continued mis-quotes and interpolations.

You're absolutely right the law does speak for itself, but you need to listen to everything it has to say:

§338-18 Disclosure of records.

(a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.

(b) The 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. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:
(1) The registrant;
(2) The spouse of the registrant;
(3) A parent of the registrant;
(4) A descendant of the registrant;
(5) A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;
(6) A legal guardian of the registrant;
(7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
(8) A personal representative of the registrant's estate;
(9) A person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
(10) Adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and who need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child's natural or legal parents;
(11) A person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;
(12) A person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and
(13) A person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.

(c) The department may permit the use [of] the data contained in public health statistical records for research purposes only, but no identifying use thereof shall be made.

(d) Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, type of vital event, and such other data as the director may authorize shall be made available to the public.

(e) The department may permit persons working on genealogy projects access to microfilm or other copies of vital records of events that occurred more than seventy-five years prior to the current year.

(f) Subject to this section, the department may direct its local agents to make a return upon filing of birth, death, and fetal death certificates with them, of certain data shown to federal, state, territorial, county, or municipal agencies. Payment by these agencies for these services may be made as the department shall direct.

(g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:
(1) A person who has a direct and tangible interest in the record but requests a verification in lieu of a certified copy;
(2) A governmental agency or organization who for a legitimate government purpose maintains and needs to update official lists of persons in the ordinary course of the agency's or organization's activities;
(3) A governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks confirmation of a certified copy of any such record submitted in support of or information provided about a vital event relating to any such record and contained in an official application made in the ordinary course of the agency's or organization's activities by an individual seeking employment with, entrance to, or the services or products of the agency or organization;
(4) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of or for purposes of legal proceedings; or
(5) An individual employed, endorsed, or sponsored by a governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record in preparation of reports or publications by the agency or organization for research or educational purposes. [L 1949, c 327, §22; RL 1955, §57-21; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; am L 1967, c 30, §2; HRS §338-18; am L 1977, c 118, §1; am L 1991, c 190, §1; am L 1997, c 305, §5; am L 2001, c 246, §2]

the hilighted portions are the parts you aren't listening to:

a. The Department of Health sets the rules whereby the records in its keeping may be viewed, and how they are viewed (verification of the informaiton or provision of a certified copy);
b. If the Department is not satisfied that the records are being requested for a legitimate purpose, then they MUST refuse to allow access.

Given that Hawaii has already provided certified copies of the BC, the Department of Health has satisfied its legal obligations.

 

[LSSBB]

Mr Prey the challenge to you is try and view your own original,not a copy, birth certficate

There is obviously an effort here to face that challenge or address the "original or copy" question because it demolishes what he has been arguing about, and the discussion lives on.

 

[JayUtah]

Hawaii law speaks for itself...

No, that's not how America works.

If there is a question whether a law applies, or what a law means in any particular situation or scenario, that scenario is brought to court and the court makes a definitive and legally binding ruling. That has happened in this specific case, and the ruling is explicitly against your interpretation. Someone who is legally permitted to view another's birth information is nevertheless not entitled to do so by inspecting the paper original; he may have only the standard certified copy that everyone else gets, including the registrant. Kindly do not try to shirk the fact that you're attempting to interpret the law differently for everyone.

...as do your continued mis-quotes and interpolations.

Heal thyself.

 

[Hans]

Robert wouldn't it just be easier to demonstrate the validity of your view by documenting your visit to see your own original birth certificate held by state x?

Why are you avoiding doing this obvious next step - by recording it you'll prove us all wrong.....

 

[LSSBB]

There is obviously an effort here to face that challenge or address the "original or copy" question because it demolishes what he has been arguing about, and the discussion lives on.

I meant "not face", by the way.

 

[Robert Prey]

No, that's not how America works.

If there is a question whether a law applies, or what a law means in any particular situation or scenario, that scenario is brought to court and the court makes a definitive and legally binding ruling. That has happened in this specific case, and the ruling is explicitly against your interpretation. Someone who is legally permitted to view another's birth information is nevertheless not entitled to do so by inspecting the paper original; he may have only the standard certified copy that everyone else gets, including the registrant. Kindly do not try to shirk the fact that you're attempting to interpret the law differently for everyone.
Heal thyself.

Ҥ338-18 Disclosure of records. (a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.
(b) The 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. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:
(1) The registrant;
(2) The spouse of the registrant;
(3) A parent of the registrant;
(4) A descendant of the registrant;
(5) A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;
(6) A legal guardian of the registrant;
(7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;"

The Law is the Law. Deal with it.

 

[LSSBB]

Ҥ338-18 Disclosure of records. (a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.
(b) The 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. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:
(1) The registrant;
(2) The spouse of the registrant;
(3) A parent of the registrant;
(4) A descendant of the registrant;
(5) A person having a common ancestor with the registrant;
(6) A legal guardian of the registrant;
(7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;"

The Law is the Law. Deal with it.

Do you question the Copy or the Original? Deal with it.

 

[Border Reiver]

The Law is the Law. Deal with it.

Yes, and IF the Department of Health is satisfied that the person making a request for a copy of the record, OR to inspect the record - the Department of Health will then decide, in accordance with the regulations, in what form the qualified person will get the copy of the record.

 

[JayUtah]

The Law is the Law. Deal with it.

And the court's interpretation of that law is legally binding whether you choose to recognize it or not. The Hawaii court has decided explicitly that even if someone is authorized under HRC 338-18(b)(7) to obtain vital information, he is not entitled to that information in the form of access to the original paper birth certificate. Someone making a valid request under HRC 318-18(b)(7) and presenting the proper credentials to show he is the duly designated agent is entitled only to a certified copy of the certificate.

Your reading of the law to a different end is simply irrelevant. You do not have the authority to interpret Hawaii law for everyone.

In your rush to vilify, you omit to note that Obama himself invoked 318-18(b)(7) to arrange for his lawyer to get a certified copy of his birth certificate. The question is not whether Obama can designate someone else to get a copy of his certificate -- he can, and did. The question is whether anyone so designated can see the original and verify with his own eyes that the original paper certificate bears the appropriate information. The law does not authorize or permit that specific activity.

Your bolding of "except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health" is a step in the right direction. "As authorized by this part" tells us to look at the rest of the law in which we find a detailed list of who may access this information. "By rules adopted by the department of health" tells us to look elsewhere also. I've done that, but you clearly haven't.

The rules of the department are meant to guide its employees between the conflicting goals of safeguarding the information from inappropriately prying eyes and safeguarding the authoritative records of that information from loss or damage, and facilitating access to that information to those who are legally entitled to obtain it. Those rules go into great detail about making and certifying copies, issuing verifications, etc. They are entirely silent on the subject of furnishing the originals. That is because it is never done.

The question of whether the department of health may be compelled to forego all their rules and permit access by third parties to the paper originals, for whose integrity and endurance the department is made singularly responsible by statue, has been put to the courts and decided. It has been decided against your interpretation.

Nothing in HRC 338-18 requires the DOH to permit access to the paper originals of birth certificates. That is res judicata and everything you try to say otherwise is simply wrong. The most any person can obtain is a certified copy. That includes the governor of Hawaii.

This is, by my count, the fourth time I have patiently and completely described this for you. And it will likely be the fourth time you will stick your fingers in your ears, repeat your trite "deal with it" line, and give me no more than a one-sentence brush-off.

These facts remain:

Your personal interpretation of this law is irrelevant; the courts have already spoken.

You have yet to tell us what you think an "original birth certificate" is and whether you think you have one.

You have yet to demonstrate your belief by attempting to see your original paper birth certificate.