I've seen the Document.
So I'm assuming that line 2 translates into date and place of birth? Which is given as Honolulu and August 4, 1861? So if once accepts this as gospel proof of Obama's citizenship status then one would also have to accept his natural born status as well, right?
In any case, under the laws in place at the time Obama could not be a citizen. Absent anything else like adoption documentation or naturalization papers or his passport or identity card then this is not conclusive evidence.
I wouldn’t term this as “gospel proof” of anything. It’s just evidence.
On the other hand, your statement “under the laws in place at the time Obama could not be a citizen,” assuming that you are referring to Indonesia, is simply untrue. Based on other post of yours on this thread, I have already concluded that you have no idea what you are talking about with respect to Indonesian law, and this latest statement is further evidence of that truth.
Assuming a Hawaiian birth for Obama, you correctly state that he is a United States Citizen by birth, but you INCORRECTLY state that he is a “natural-born” citizen by virtue of the physical location of his birth. That stems from a common but false equivocating between native-born and natural-born.
Obama would ONLY have natural born citizenship if his father was an American citizen at the time of Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Otherwise he has citizenship by statute; i.e. a form of naturalized citizenship. Since Obama’s father was a British subject at the time of Obama’s birth, he cannot be a natural-born citizen, despite being a US citizen by birth.
Please don’t come back at me with some nonsense about multiple classes of citizenship. There are MANY varieties of citizenship. Citizenship is something that can be sliced and diced many ways to draw valid distinctions. The point is that there is only one set of criteria for natural born citizenship, and no matter which set of facts you take, Obama does not meet them.
Not so. There is no equivalency there.
His alleged birthplace of Honolulu would not have been a requirement for entrance into the Indonesian school system and would have had no bearing whatsoever on his application for acceptance. His parents could have stated on that form that he was born in Timbuktu or on the planet Venus, and Indonesia would not have requested documentation or cared one iota about it. So a lie there would be inconsequential and irrelevant to his admission to the school.
On the other hand, his Indonesian citizenship would have been a substantive requirement for entrance into the system for which documentation would have to have been provided, especially given the fact that they stated that he was foreign born.
The fact that he was allowed into the Indonesian educational system at all, a system set aside for Indonesian citizens [not those born in Hawaii] is a compelling indication that his parents' statement regarding his Indonesian citizenship was true and they possessed and presented the documentation to back it up.