Breaking News and Confirmed: Arizona Senate Passes Presidential Eligibility Bill 21-9

[bigrebnc1775]

Nope you made it relevant when you made it a religous isse.

If you're not going to be honest, then just stop talking. I never made it a religious issue. It's a constitutional issue. No religious test can be required to hold the office of the POTUS.

Your reply not mine

It requires no such thing. it simply lists for forms of proof that are acceptable. The U.S. State Department will often accept a baptismal certificate in place of a valid birth certificate on visa applications. Is that a violation of the Constitution? If so, there are millions of foreigners in this country who need to be kicked out.

No, it's not a violation of the constitution because the constitution does not prohibit the government from using religious based records for visa applications. Furthermore, such people have options, and choose to use baptismal records.

However, the constitution explicitly forbids any religious test from being applied to a person in order to hold the office of President of the United States. The AZ law would seem to present such a test. The law refuses to honor certain types of birth records from other states. Candidates who come from states whose records are not honored by AZ would then be explicitly required by the statute to present a baptismal record. This then creates the situation that all people from the many states who do not issue the restrictive class of records that AZ demands must have been baptized. Any person who is from one of those states, and who was not baptized is deemed by the AZ law as ineligible to the Presidency. Therefore, the law is additionally unconstitutional because it requires a religious test to be applied.

 

[WorldWatcher]

YOU give the FEDERAL CONGRESS too much POWER...

Actually I don't, the Constitution gives Congress the power and responsibility and has since it's final ratification on June 21st, 1788

Constitution of the United States
Article IV - The States
Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others
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.​

Yes, the Constitution is Okee Doakee with me.

9th and TENTH Amendments...*YES* they still have relevence...they haven't been written out, only largely *IGNORED* and BY YOU...

Let's take a look...

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.​

The 9th Amendment refers to the rights of people, governments don't have rights, people have rights. So the 9th doesn't apply.

Now for the 10th Amendment. Please note that only those powers not delegated to the United States are retained by the States. The power to determine the "effect thereof" of public records between the various States is specifically delegated to the Congress of the United States via Article IV Section 1. Since it's delegted to the United States the Arizona legislature is not empowered to reject public birth records from another State. Well that is unless you can site the section of the United States Code that one State need not honor the public birth record of another State.

Do you have that section of the USC handy?


**********************


Thomas, you should try to be more knowledgeable about the Constitution before you site it.


>>>>

One more time Arizona with accept Hawaii's long form

One more time accepting the long form isn't the issue, the issue is rejecting the Short Form which violates the United States Constitution Article IV Section 1 unless authorized by the United States Congress under it's authority to determine the "Effect thereof" of public records between the States.


>>>>

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Actually I don't, the Constitution gives Congress the power and responsibility and has since it's final ratification on June 21st, 1788

Constitution of the United States
Article IV - The States
Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others
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.​

Yes, the Constitution is Okee Doakee with me.





Let's take a look...

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment 10
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.​

The 9th Amendment refers to the rights of people, governments don't have rights, people have rights. So the 9th doesn't apply.

Now for the 10th Amendment. Please note that only those powers not delegated to the United States are retained by the States. The power to determine the "effect thereof" of public records between the various States is specifically delegated to the Congress of the United States via Article IV Section 1. Since it's delegted to the United States the Arizona legislature is not empowered to reject public birth records from another State. Well that is unless you can site the section of the United States Code that one State need not honor the public birth record of another State.

Do you have that section of the USC handy?


**********************


Thomas, you should try to be more knowledgeable about the Constitution before you site it.


>>>>

One more time Arizona with accept Hawaii's long form

One more time accepting the long form isn't the issue, the issue is rejecting the Short Form which violates the United States Constitution Article IV Section 1 unless authorized by the United States Congress under it's authority to determine the "Effect thereof" of public records between the States.


>>>>

The short form is a fraud, never was accepted by the state registrar of 1961

 

[bripat9643]

The Arizona Secretary of State says that the Hawaii COLB would meet the standards of the proposed Arizona birfer bill.

azcentral.com video: Obama birth certificate faces Arizona scrutiny in 2012

This would be good enough, according to the guy who would be responsible for enforcing the AZ birfer bill.

The secretary of State is full of shit. He claims that the Hospital, Attending physician and witness signatures are not required. The law states explicitly that they are.

He's a Democrat hack - a product of the "secretary of state project" the Democrats are running to ensure election fraud continues.

Ken Bennett is a Republican.

Ken Bennett - Biography

Then he's a RINO and a moron.

 

[Toro]

The short form is a fraud, never was accepted by the state registrar of 1961

It has a state seal.

 

[Toro]

The secretary of State is full of shit. He claims that the Hospital, Attending physician and witness signatures are not required. The law states explicitly that they are.

He's a Democrat hack - a product of the "secretary of state project" the Democrats are running to ensure election fraud continues.

Ken Bennett is a Republican.

Ken Bennett - Biography

Then he's a RINO and a moron.

Of course he is.

Not a birfer / extremist = RINO.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The Arizona Secretary of State says that the Hawaii COLB would meet the standards of the proposed Arizona birfer bill.

azcentral.com video: Obama birth certificate faces Arizona scrutiny in 2012

This would be good enough, according to the guy who would be responsible for enforcing the AZ birfer bill.

The secretary of State is full of shit. He claims that the Hospital, Attending physician and witness signatures are not required. The law states explicitly that they are.

He's a Democrat hack - a product of the "secretary of state project" the Democrats are running to ensure election fraud continues.

Ken Bennett is a Republican.

Ken Bennett - Biography

Hows many times did the media report Bohner was supposed to have said something when later it was found out he didn't say it? How many times was it reported that any Republican was suppose to have said something but later the claim was found to be wrong?

 

[gekaap]

Then he's a RINO and a moron.

So anyone who disagrees with you is a moron. Just shut the fuck up if you have nothing to say.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The short form is a fraud, never was accepted by the state registrar of 1961

It has a state seal.

nothing new about democrats supporting a fraud. But does it have an accepted by state registrar date?

 

[gekaap]

Here's a question, what makes people think that the states have any right to statutorily establish any qualifications for running for the Presidency when they certainly have no right to do so for Congressional offices?

 

[gekaap]

nothing new about democrats supporting a fraud. But does it have an accepted by state registrar date?

The government of Hawaii has already explained that it no longer puts distinct "accepted by" and "filed by" dates on their birth records. Why do you insist on ignoring them?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Here's a question, what makes people think that the states have any right to statutorily establish any qualifications for running for the Presidency when they certainly have no right to do so for Congressional offices?

oh so now it's an issue?

 

[Toro]

The secretary of State is full of shit. He claims that the Hospital, Attending physician and witness signatures are not required. The law states explicitly that they are.

He's a Democrat hack - a product of the "secretary of state project" the Democrats are running to ensure election fraud continues.

Ken Bennett is a Republican.

Ken Bennett - Biography

Hows many times did the media report Bohner was supposed to have said something when later it was found out he didn't say it? How many times was it reported that any Republican was suppose to have said something but later the claim was found to be wrong?

He said it on the video.

 

[gekaap]

He said it on the video.

The video is a fraud. It was never accepted by the station, it was only aired by the station.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

nothing new about democrats supporting a fraud. But does it have an accepted by state registrar date?

The government of Hawaii has already explained that it no longer puts distinct "accepted by" and "filed by" dates on their birth records. Why do you insist on ignoring them?

We are talking about a document from 1961 I don't care what hawaii says they do now what they do now does not pretain to what they did back in 1961
Here you have one from 1930 one from 1961 and one from 1977

[/IMG]

If hawaii no longer does it why did they do it for the 1930 and the 1977?

 

[gekaap]

If hawaii no longer does it why did they do it in 1930 and 1977?

Talk about documents from 1961 all you want, Obama's birth certificate was printed in 2007.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If hawaii no longer does it why did they do it in 1930 and 1977?

Talk about documents from 1961 all you want, Obama's birth certificate was printed in 2007.

take a closer look at thoise three documents they say rev. 11/01 they are photo copies if one has it then all three should have the same accepted by state registrar stamp.

Yes we know it was printed in 2007 doubtful it existed in 1961 though

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ken Bennett is a Republican.

Ken Bennett - Biography

Hows many times did the media report Bohner was supposed to have said something when later it was found out he didn't say it? How many times was it reported that any Republican was suppose to have said something but later the claim was found to be wrong?

He said it on the video.

I listen t the video, and all I have to say is he misspoke and should review the new law before making anymore comments. Kind of reminds me of the sheriff in Arizona who misspoke about longhner and the cause of the shooting.

 

[WorldWatcher]

If hawaii no longer does it why did they do it in 1930 and 1977?

Talk about documents from 1961 all you want, Obama's birth certificate was printed in 2007.

take a closer look at thoise three documents they say rev. 11/01 they are photo copies if one has it then all three should have the same accepted by state registrar stamp.

Yes we know it was printed in 2007 doubtful it existed in 1961 though

Those aren't photo copies.


>>>>

 

[bucs90]

Obama was born in Kenya.

But the reality is no one is gonna truly go after that.