Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

About those Birth Certificates (a little history)

leave a comment »

From one of my links, which compares ( in two columns ) sovereign vs. corporate USA,
this pesky topic keeps coming up — about Birth Certificates. Again, many parents are shocked to find out that the court considers all children “our” children, and parents as either domestic stock to be bred and managed, and parents are trustees (as in farmers) of that stock — so long as they mind their Ps and Qs, which are whatever said government determines they are.


I have recently (2013) been re-reading the Family Code in my state (amazing, what a marriage is, and the only 3 ways to get out of it — Death, Nullify, or Dissolve. To d Nullify or Dissolve — like to get a marriage CERTIFICATE — requires the cooperation of this government. They (it) has a lot of say in how this is done. Really, if we knew our history – -and economy (it has never really gotten off a plantation-style economy — although some of the plantations may be overseas, or behind closed doors (or bars) further from public view (as were — just reminding us here – concentration camps, primarily, right?)….we would understand this.

_ _ _ _ _
Main page (that I’ve put for consideration on “Vital Info/Links”):

This may overall feel very “libertarian” (Ron Paul is mentioned, etc.). However, I’m getting to be an old codger (or would be, except for gender) pretty soon, and my years and recent (last, oh few decades) of experiencer have led me to believe that if MORe people understood this better when they were young (as I didn’t, being a product of the public schools, plus a family not of a businessman, but of a white-collar though non-Ph.D. job-holder, my father) — it would have been a better country.

Also, in my experience, I still believe — although it’s going to offend many — that the public school system, a major expense (and its pension funds a major investment platform for any school district) — is designed to slow kids down and waste the most valuable years of their lives, not to mention of recently (ca. 1980s forwards) of course a conduit to both cause and diagnose mental health problems and trauma, call it ADHD (or whatever) and prescribe lots of Ritalin. or Risperdal. or, you name it. The system requires huge community support to succeed and is a caste sorter as well, while claiming to be the opposite (go through your Congress – US Congress, state Congresses & legislatures) and find out how many are actually graduates of the local school system, without being born into a political or judicial type family. (If I ever retire, I may do that study)….

If I were a parent, my response to having a child in Newtown, Connecticut public schools, or other systems, would be to find a better way to educate them which doesn’t require lockdown practice and put them at high risk (or any risk) of being molested by teachers, joining gangs, or being shown how gangs work, and in short finding more worthwhile things to do with their energies — which as we know, can be pretty high for kids and adolescents…

So, this is about BIRTH CERTIFICATES.

From the link, pretty far down on this list of comparisons — but this is a hyperlink leading to a discussion of the birth certificate, compared to warehouse receipts, and it mentions “Children’s Bureau.” That is HIGHLY relevant to family court matters, as funding for a lot of the programs seems to come from this division of HHS federally (the Children’s Bureau) — and many states have this; or they have a “Children’s Trust,” Commission, etc. Basic translation is conduit for programming…

A certificate is a “paper establishing an ownership claim.” – Barron’s Dictionary of Banking Terms.  Registration of births began in 1915, by the Bureau of Census, with all states adopting the practice by 1933.
Birth and marriage certificates are a form of securities called “warehouse receipts.”  The items included on a warehouse receipt, as descried at §7-202 of the Uniform Commercial Code, the law which governs commercial paper and transactions, which parallel a birth or marriage certificate are:
-the location of the warehouse where the goods are stored…(residence)
-the date of issue of the receipt…..(“Date issued”)
-the consecutive number of the receipt…(found on back or front of the certificate, usually in red numbers)
-a description of the goods or of the packages containing them…(name, sex, date of birth, etc.)
-the signature of the warehouseman, which may be made by his authorized agent…(municipal clerk or state registrar’s signature)
Birth/marriage certificates now appear to at least qualify as “warehouse receipts” under the Uniform Commercial Code.  Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th ed. defines:
warehouse receipt. “…A warehouse receipt, which is considered a document of title, may be a negotiable instrument and is often used for financing with inventory as security.”
Since the U.S. went bankrupt in 1933, all new money has to be borrowed into existence.  All states started issuing serial-numbered, certificated “warehouse receipts” for births and marriages in order to pledge us as collateral against those loans and municipal bonds taken out with the Federal Reserve’s banks.  The “Full faith and Credit” of the American people is said to be that which back the nation’s debt.  That simply means the American people’s ability to labor and pay back that debt.  In order to catalog its laborers, the government needed an efficient, methodical system of tracking its property to that end.  Humans today are looked upon merely as resources – “human resources,” that is.
Governmental assignment of a dollar value to the heads of citizens began on July 14, 1862 when President Lincoln offered 6 percent interest bearing-bonds to states who freed their slaves on a “per head” basis.  This practice of valuating humans (cattle?) continues today with our current system of debt-based currency reliant upon a steady stream of fresh new chattels to back it.
Additional Birth Certificate Research
Federal Children
 by Joyce Rosenwald
In 1921, the federal Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act created the birth “registration” or what we now know as the “birth certificate.” It was known as the “Maternity Act” and was sold to the American people as a law that would reduce maternal and infant mortality, protect the health of mothers and infants, and for “other purposes.” One of those other purposes provided for the establishment of a federal bureau designed to cooperate with state agencies in the overseeing of its operations and expenditures. What it really did was create a federal birth registry which exists today, creating “federal children.” This government, under the doctrine of “Parens Patriae,” now legislates for American children as if they are owned by the federal government. Through the public school enrollment process and continuing license requirements for most aspects of daily life, these children grow up to be adults indoctrinated into the process of asking for “permission” from Daddy government to do all those things necessary to carry out daily activities that exist in what is called a “free country.”
Before 1921 the records of births and names of children were entered into family bibles, as were the records of marriages and deaths. These records were readily accepted by both the family and the law as “official” records. Since 1921 the American people have been registering the births and names of their children with the government of the state in which they are born, even though there is no federal law requiring it. The state tells you that registering your child’s birth through the birth certificate serves as proof that he/she was born in the united States , thereby making him/her a United States Citizen. For the past several years a social security number has been mandated by the federal government to be issued at birth.
In 1933, bankruptcy was declared by President Roosevelt. The governors of the then 48 States pledged the “full faith and credit” of their states, including the citizenry, as collateral for loans of credit from the Federal Reserve system. To wit:”Full faith and credit” clause of Const. U.S. article 4. sec. 1, requires that foreign judgement be given such faith and credit as it had by law or usage of state of it’s origin. That foreign statutes are to have force and effect to which they are entitled in home state. And that a judgement or record shall have the same faith, credit, conclusive effect, and obligatory force in other states as it has by law or usage in the state from whence taken.
Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Ed. cites omitted.
The state claims an interest in every child within it’s jurisdiction. The state will, if it deems it necessary, nullify your parental rights and appoint a guardian (trustee) over your children. The subject of every birth certificate is a child. The child is a valuable asset, which if properly trained, can contribute valuable assets provided by its labor for many years. It is presumed by those who have researched this issue, that the child itself is the asset of the trust established by the birth certificate, and the social security number is the numbering or registration of the trust, allowing for the assets of the trust to be tracked. If this information is true, your child is now owned by the state. Each one of us, including our children, are considered assets of the bankrupt united states. We are now designated by this government as “HUMAN RESOURCES,” with a new crop born every year.”
In 1923, a suit was brought against federal officials charged with the administration of the maternity act, who were citizens of another state, to enjoin them from enforcing it, wherein the plaintiff averred that the act was unconstitutional, and that it’s purpose was to induce the States to yield sovereign rights reserved by them through the federal Constitution’s 10th amendment and not granted to the federal government, and that the burden of the appropriations falls unequally upon the several States, held, that, as the statute does not require the plaintiff to do or yield anything, and as no burden is imposed by it other than that of taxation, which falls, not on the State but on her inhabitants, who are within the federal as well as the state taxing power, the complaint resolves down to the naked contention that Congress has usurped reserved powers of the States by the mere enactment of the statute, though nothing has been, or is to be, done under it without their consent (Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury et.al..) Mr. Alexander Lincoln, Assistant Attorney General, argued for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts . To wit:
I. The act is unconstitutional. It purports to vest in agencies of the Federal Government powers which are almost wholly undefined, in matters relating to maternity and infancy, and to authorize appropriations of federal funds for the purposes of the act.
Many examples may be given and were stated in the debates on the bill in Congress of regulations which may be imposed under the act. THE FORCED REGISTRATION OF PREGNANCY, GOVERNMENTAL PRENATAL EXAMINATION OF EXPECTANT MOTHERS, RESTRICTIONS ON THE RIGHT OF A WOMAN TO SECURE THE SERVICES OF A MIDWIFE OR PHYSICIAN OF HER OWN SELECTION, are measures to which the people of those States which accept its provisions may be subjected. There is nothing which prohibits the payment of subsidies out of federal appropriations. INSURANCE OF MOTHERS MAY BE MADE COMPULSORY. THE TEACHING OF BIRTH CONTROL AND PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF PERSONS ABOUT TO MARRY MAY BE REQUIRED.
By section 4 of the act, the Children’s Bureau is given all necessary powers to cooperate with the state agencies in the administration of the act. Hence it is given the power to assist in the enforcement of the plans submitted to it, and for that purpose by its agents to go into the several States and to do those acts for which the plans submitted may provide. As to what those plans shall provide, the final arbiters are the Bureau and the Board. THE FACT THAT IT WAS CONSIDERED NECESSARY IN EXPLICIT TERMS TO PRESERVE FROM INVASION BY FEDERAL OFFICIALS THE RIGHT OF THE PARENT TO THE CUSTODY AND CARE OF HIS CHILD AND THE SANCTITY OF HIS HOME SHOWS HOW FAR REACHING ARE THE POWERS WHICH WERE INTENDED TO BE GRANTED BY THE ACT.

. . . .

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

January 24, 2013 at 5:08 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: