The Importance of President Obama's Birth Certificate

Jeffrey Camino By Jeffrey R. Camino
LearnBibleProphecy.com

There is a great deal of controversy over whether President Obama has the credentials, per the U.S. Constitution, to hold the office of The President of the United States. Recently (three years into his presidency) he has produced a "Certificate of Live Birth" that allegedly validates he was born in Hawaii.

However, some questions remain about the authenticity of that document and whether or not it actually proves his aforementioned eligibility. For example, the quality of the document and letters appear extremely clear, though experts suggest the letters would have bled into the paper a lot more over the past 50 years. I don't know if that is true or not, as I am not an expert. It does raise questions, but alone is not concern enough. Others point out his father's race is listed as "African", yet the term used in the early 60's, when the document was allegedly recorded, was actually "negro". Once again, I don't know if perhaps, because his father actually was "African", that it would not have been recorded that way.

This may be a good place to interject that this is not a matter of race! If there were the same questions surrounding a white, Anglo-Saxon, protestant president, many people would want to know more. Someone like Timothy McVeigh would get equal or more scrutiny if he were president and his credentials were questionable. Indeed it's about a much more important matter: just who is our president, what values, ideology, and beliefs does he hold, and are they in line with the best interests of the United States?

What makes that issue difficult to deal with is that the press is readily accepting the document, though we have to seriously question if the press is doing its job!!! Why this issue was not investigated while President Obama was running for office rather than actually holding the office is astounding. Where was the press when there was some uncertainty about this? The biggest question I have is why only now release this document that has been asked for time and time again? Why isn't the mainstream press asking that very important question? What was the motivation behind not producing it years ago? Was it to make some point that we have no right to know or that it should not be a constitutional requirement? I can't see either of those reasons settling well with most people. Was there some other reason? I can not think of any good reason!

Another important consideration about this matter is this: where was the press when there was some questions about what college papers President Obama wrote? While not the "all knowing, all telling" indication of one's political beliefs, ideology, and potential agenda, I would think they could weigh into the matter some. In fact, it's still ambiguous to me where President Obama went to school, what he was taught, who his friends are/were, what they have to say about him, etc. When one applies for employment to any place with some reasonable degree of importance a background check is done. Frankly, the "employers" (the American people via the press) did not do their due diligence.

Had the issue of the birth certificate and such been discussed prior to the presidential election, the American people could have, at that time, made the decision at the polls of whether or not it was an issue. (Though arguable the founding fathers intended for it be a law, not something we vote on based on "popularity".) We'll never know how it may have played out, because the issue never made front page news and, therefore, is only being dealt with now, after the election. One thing has surfaced: we can not rely on the news media to do its job. Consequently, we have to rely on the Internet and underground news outlets to piece together information, which can be dicey at best.

On that note, I have seen some people claim President Obama's own grandmother said she saw him born in Kenya. Without a document or video substantiating that (and perhaps one exists that I don't know about), that argument also doesn't stand well on its own.

Still, all of these arguments together do bring up a legitimate question, don't you think?

Consequently, there is still a cloud of doubt about whether or not President Obama is actually legally holding the office of President of the United States. Now, some people are quick (too quick) to say that it should be a non-issue and that anyone discussing the matter is doing so foolishly. They mention that our economy is in trouble, we have conflicts going on around the world, and that there are otherwise many other issues to be addressed. It's for exactly those reasons this is an important issue! Let's examine that further...

The founding fathers of the United States did a fantastic job drawing up our Constitution. It took them a long time to do so as they carefully thought out, debated, and finally agreed to all that its comprised of. They carefully added many important things: like establishing the three branches of government (wherein a "checks and balances" system is in place), establishing what congress may and may not do, creating the courts and their function, ensuring U.S. citizens enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and so on.

Article II of the Constitution establishes the Office of the President and requirements thereof. Therein we have the issue that someone must be a natural born citizen, age 35, have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years prior, and so on.

Why were those qualifications included? Were the founders racist or trying some political tactic to keep certain people from office? No, of course not!!!

So, then, what were they thinking? It's quite clear if you logically think this through: they were properly recognizing that it would be in the best interest of the U.S. if they could reasonably ensure that the person holding the highest office in the land was absolutely loyal to the U.S.; thus, all of the ideology, motivation, agenda, and consequent decisions that person made always had the best interest of the U.S. in mind (whether or not they were right, at least it could be reasonably assured the right intentions were there!)

That is why it is an important issue. If the President of the United States has had substantial influence from another nation's ideas or from a religion that is hateful and opposed to the religion that most of the citizens of the U.S. hold, then it is important to know that. In essence, it protects us from "enemies both foreign and domestic" and from ending up with someone that is really a "spy" of sorts that makes policy not in the best interest of the U.S.

Questions remain, such as if it is a legitimate document? I wont' rehash some of the points that reasonably question that, but I think the main point is worth asking: what, then, was the motivation behind hiding this document for so long? Why hide a document substantiating ones eligibility, per the constitution, to be in office and pay so much money to do so, only to eventually produce it anyway? Many employers require that one's work history be valid or ask for official college transcripts conditional to employment, and that is a very reasonable request.

It's not a "non-issue" as some people claim. In fact, saying that it's a non-issue is demonstrating a blindness to the intent of why that requirement was put in the constitution in the first place. Moreover, blindly accepting a document that was produced years later and still has a lot of questions about its authenticity is simply foolish at best.

Time will tell how this all plays out, though I'm not sure if it will ever be settled. Should the Lord tarry, it could go down as one of the most unsolved conspiracy theories ever. Who shot Kennedy, what happened at Roswell, was President Obama ever a legal holder of the office... ?

Now you may be asking, "What does this have to do with Bible prophecy?" I think it may have a lot to do with that, as discussed in a previous article entitled, "Where Is President Obama Leading Us?".

Related Links