Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Naming a son Barack Hussein Obama was illegal under Hawaii Law in 1961
Google Books ^ | 1860 | Hawaiian Government

Posted on 01/21/2011 10:43:11 PM PST by bushpilot1

Section 2. All children born in wedlock after the passage of this Act shall have their father’s name as a family name.

They shall, besides, have a Christian name suitable to their sex.

Section 3.. All illegitimate children born after the passage of this Act shall have their mother’s name as a family name. They shall, besides, have a. Christian name suitable to their sex.

This law was in effect until 1967. Barack and Hussein are Semitic words, they are not Christian. They are not from the English language.

How is it possible the birth certificate displayed is legal when the name is illegal.

What is real his real name? Where was he born?

All of this does not really matter..his father is a foreigner. He can never be a natural born citizen. It sure would be nice to know his real name

(Excerpt) Read more at books.google.com ...


TOPICS: Dimensional Doorway; Humor; Outdoors
KEYWORDS: certifigate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-122 next last
Photobucket
1 posted on 01/21/2011 10:43:15 PM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LucyT

ping


2 posted on 01/21/2011 10:45:29 PM PST by porter_knorr (John Adams would be arrested for his thoughts on tyrants today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: porter_knorr

Bookmark


3 posted on 01/21/2011 10:48:31 PM PST by Publius6961 ("In 1964 the War on Poverty Began --- Poverty won.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: bushpilot1

“Christian name” is just another way of saying “first name”. Hawaii is saying all birth certificates must have a first name for the child

Yeah might be hard to believe (with all the atheism we have these days) but back then “Christian name” was just a way of saying “first name”


5 posted on 01/21/2011 10:49:35 PM PST by dennisw (- - - -He who does not economize will have to agonize - - - - - Confucius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

What’s with all the aliasing around many of the letters?


6 posted on 01/21/2011 10:51:12 PM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Race: African????? Definitely NOT 1961 terminology!


7 posted on 01/21/2011 10:53:33 PM PST by XHogPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Christian name is an old-fashioned way of saying “first name”.


8 posted on 01/21/2011 10:53:33 PM PST by Defiant (There is no line on the march towards marxism that Democrats won't cross. Democrat=CPUSA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Defiant

Christian name is an old-fashioned way of saying “first name”.>>>>

Yup. To not know this shows how much things have changed towards atheists being in charge


9 posted on 01/21/2011 10:56:37 PM PST by dennisw (- - - -He who does not economize will have to agonize - - - - - Confucius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

“Christian Name” doesn’t mean an English name. In legal documents,a “Christian Name” means one’s given name (first name) while a “Family Name” is the last name. “Christian Names” are unique to the individual while “Family Names” are inherited.


10 posted on 01/21/2011 10:57:08 PM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

I don’t know what that document you posted is but to the nekkid eye it looks manipulated as all get out. There is something odd with the perspective of the stuff on the right compared to the left. Maybe it is just the way it was photographed.

Somebody smarter than me could make a more technical appraisal I’m sure, but that thing looks weird.

Don’t much matter, his old dead daddy was a British subject that makes him non-American from what I’ve read anywho.


11 posted on 01/21/2011 10:57:25 PM PST by West Texas Chuck (Eat the young, 100 million guppies can't be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aruanan

jpg images use lossy compression.


12 posted on 01/21/2011 10:58:14 PM PST by Kirkwood (Zombie Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Of course it is very constitutional for a state to dictate what names you can and cannot name your child.


13 posted on 01/21/2011 10:58:55 PM PST by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1

Jech v. Burch. 466 F. Supp. 714 - US: Dist. Court, D. Hawaii 1979.

“There is no known case in which the requirements of “a Christian name” that was “suitable to their sex” were ever enforced. One wonders whether Grand Constable Anne de Montmorency, first owner of the Chateau de Chantilly, could have been so named had he been born in Hawaii between 1860 and 1967.”

“Plaintiffs have a Constitutionally protected right to give their own child any surname they choose. The refusal of the registrar of births to accept the surname “Jebef” as the child’s surname is a deprivation under color of state law of a right secured by the Constitution of the United States.”


14 posted on 01/21/2011 11:00:25 PM PST by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aruanan

I’m certainly no expert here but taking a digital photo of lettering and saving as a .jpg causes some weird artifacts.

But that doc, whatever it is, looks strange. And, it’s still real “birth certificate” like that nimrod governor is supposed to be looking for.


15 posted on 01/21/2011 11:00:31 PM PST by West Texas Chuck (Eat the young, 100 million guppies can't be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: West Texas Chuck

Carp, I mean “not” a real BC. Too late and too much Dogfish.


16 posted on 01/21/2011 11:02:02 PM PST by West Texas Chuck (Eat the young, 100 million guppies can't be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot1
This law was in effect until 1967

No it wasn't. It may have been the will of the people. It may have been on the books. But it could not have been in effect, because it's unconstitutional on its face.

Barack and Hussein are Semitic words, they are not Christian.

No law requiring Christian names can be constitutional. The Constitution does not permit the establishment of a state cult.

As for those names being Semitic, that's an insult. They are clearly of the Moon God Religion.


Al-Lat, the Islamic Moon Goddess

Walk around it seven time, then kiss it.

17 posted on 01/21/2011 11:02:24 PM PST by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smokingfrog

Now THAT is interesting. Garcias for the post.


18 posted on 01/21/2011 11:05:29 PM PST by West Texas Chuck (Eat the young, 100 million guppies can't be wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: XHogPilot
Race: African????? Definitely NOT 1961 terminology!

Negro .. ! If you called anybody black back then, you had best be in the comforts of your own home .. !

19 posted on 01/21/2011 11:06:21 PM PST by CrickMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Bingo!


20 posted on 01/21/2011 11:06:45 PM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais is beatha do cheal deanaimh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-122 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson