Birth Certificate - All Capital Names

www.abodia.com/2/ see Birth
Certificates  -  Direct links at bottom

Birth Certificates – your name in ALL
Capital Letters

Sheppard-Towner Maternity and Infancy Protection Act of 1921
provided a system of federal funding to enhance the health and welfare
of women and children. Grace Abbott, Julia Lathrop, and other feminist
activists worked to get the statute adopted, and it was consistent with the
social goals of the women's movement of the nineteenth century. Various medical
groups, including the American Medical Association, opposed passage. Funding
under the act ended in 1929, and the effort to achieve further federal support
of such programs was not successful until the New Deal.

In addition to its role in
the history of women and welfare, the Sheppard-Towner Act has a significant
place in the history of federalism and the expanded role of the
federal government. The act for the first time said it was appropriate
for the federal government to respond directly to the needs of women and
children. This was and has remained a contested issue.

- - -

The Sheppard-Towner Act was passed by Congress in 1921.
The legislation authorized federal aid to states for maternity, child
health, and welfare programs. However, the Supreme Court ruled the act unconstitutional in 1922.

- - -

The
Sheppard-Towner Act of 1921, also called the Maternity Act, was a milestone in
the Progressive Era, providing for federal funding for social services.
Its purpose was to reduce infant and maternity mortality rates in the
United States, especially in poorer families. Promoted by progressives
and feminists, the law was attacked as "socialistic" by the
American Medical Association and others, and challenged in the Supreme Court.

- - -

Advanced
Civics Research Library

Structure of the Birth
Certificate

Did the State
Pledge Your Body to a Bank?

Right:  Some birth and marriage certificates are now
"warehouse receipts," printed on banknote paper, which
may mark you and yours as 'chattel' property of the banks that our
government borrows from every day.

By:  David Deschesne

Editor, Fort Fairfield
Journal

Fort Fairfield Journal,
May 11, 2005

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 described 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 backs 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 judgment 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 judgment 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.

(1) The act is invalid because it assumes powers not granted to
Congress and usurps the local police power. McCulloch v. Maryland ,
4 Wheat. 316, 405; United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 549-551.

In more recent cases,
however, the Court has shown that there are limits to the power of
Congress to pass legislation purporting to be based on one of the powers
expressly granted to Congress which in fact usurps the reserved
powers of the States, and that laws showing on their face detailed
regulation of a matter wholly within the police power of the States will be
held to be unconstitutional although they purport to be passed in the
exercise of some constitutional power. Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251; Child
Labor Tax Case, 259 U.S. 20; Hill v. Wallace, 259 U.S. 44.

The act is not made valid
by the circumstance that federal powers are to be exercised only with respect
to those States which accept the act, for
Congress cannot assume, and state legislatures cannot yield, the powers reserved
to the States by the Constitution. Message of President Monroe, May 4, 1822
; 4 Elliot's Debates, p. 525; Pollard's Lessee v. Hagan, 3 How. 212; Escanaba
Co. v. Chicago , 107 U.S. 678; Coyle v. Oklahoma , 221 U.S. 559; Cincinnati v.
Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 223 U.S. 390.

(2) The act is invalid
because it imposes on each State an illegal option either to yield a part
of its powers reserved by the Tenth Amendment or to give up its share of
appropriations under the act. A statute attempting, by imposing conditions upon
a general privilege, to exact a waiver of a constitutional right, is null and
void. Harrison v. St. Louis & San Francisco R.R. Co., 232 U.S. 318; Terral
v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529.

(3) The act is invalid
because it sets up a system of government by cooperation between the Federal
Government and certain of the States, not
provided by the Constitution. Congress cannot make laws for the
States, and it cannot delegate to the States the power to make laws for the
United States . In re Rahrer, 140 U.S. 545; Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Stewart,
253 U.S. 149; Opinion of the Justices, 239 Mass. 606.

The Maternity Act was eventually repealed, but parts
of it have been found in other legislative acts. What this act attempted to do
was set up government by appointment, run by bureaucrats with
re-delegated authority to tax, which is in itself unconstitutional. What was
once declared as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of this nation in the
past should be upheld in a court challenge today. The constitution hasn't
changed. What has changed is the way this government views human life. Today we
are defined as human resources, believed to be owned by government. The
government now wants us, as individuals, to be tagged and tracked. Government
mandated or legislated National I.D. is unconstitutional anyway you look at it.
Federal jurisdiction to legislate for the several states does not exist and
could never survive a court challenge as shown above. Writing letters to
elected public servants won't save us when we all know their agenda does not
include serving those who placed them in power. Perhaps the 10th amendment of
the federal constitution guaranteeing states rights will, if challenged, when
making it known that we as individuals of the several states will not be
treated as chattel of the U.S. government. If the federal government believes
they own us, and as such have the right to demand national I.D. cards, and
health I.D. cards, which will in truth tag us as we tag our animals, then let
them bring forth the documents to prove their authority to legislate for it. If
our G-D given rights to liberty and freedom, which were the foundation upon
which this nation was created do not exist, and liberty and freedom is only an
illusion under which the American people suffer, then let the governments of
this nation come forward and tell the people. But...if we are indeed free, then
we should not have to plead or beg before our elected public servants to be
treated as such. If, in truth we are not free, then perhaps it's time to let
the final chapter of the Great American Revolution be written..........

- - -

The
purpose of the Sheppard-Towner Act of 1921 -- sometimes called the Maternity
Act -- was "to reduce maternal and infant mortality." The legislation
was supported by progressives, social reformers, and feminists including Grace
Abbott and Julia Lathrop.

At
the time the legislation
was introduced, childbirth remained the second leading cause of death for
women. About 20% of children in the United States died in
their first year and about 33% in their first five years. Family income
was an important factor in these mortality rates, and the Sheppard-Towner Act
was designed to encourage states to develop programs to serve women at lower
income levels.

The
Sheppard-Towner Act provided for federal matching funds for such programs as:

·
health clinics for women
and children, hiring physicians and nurses to educate and care for pregnant
women and mothers and their children

·
visiting nurses to educate
and care for pregnant and new mothers

·
midwife training

·
distribution of nutrition
and hygiene information

Support
and Opposition

Julia
Lathrop of the U.S.
Children's Bureau drafted the language of the act, and Jeannette
Rankin introduced it into Congress in 1919. Rankin was no longer in
the Congress when the Sheppard-Towner Act passed in 1921. Two similar
Senate bills were introduced by Morris Sheppard and Horace Mann Towner.
President Warren G. Harding supported the Sheppard-Towner Act, as did many in
the progressive movement.

Groups
including the American Medical Association (AMA) and its Section on Pediatrics
labeled the program "socialistic" and opposed its passage and opposed
its funding in subsequent years.

End
of the Sheppard-Towner Act

By
1929, the political climate had changed sufficiently that the funding for the
Sheppard-Towner Act was ended, with pressure from opposition groups likely the
major reason for the de-funding.

Significance
of the Sheppard-Towner Act

The
Sheppard-Towner Act, which was unsuccessfully challenged in the Supreme Court
in Frothingham
V. Mellon And Massachusetts V. Mellon (1923), was significant in
American legal history because it was the first federally-funded social welfare
program, and because the challenge to the Supreme Court failed.

The
Sheppard-Towner Act is significant in women's history because it addressed the
needs of women and children directly at a federal level.

It
is also significant for the role of women activists including Jeannette Rankin,
Julia Lathrop, and Grace Abbott, who considered it part of the women's rights
agenda beyond winning the vote for women. The League
of Women Voters and the General
Federation of Women's Clubs worked for its passage. It shows one of the
ways that the women's rights movement continued to work after the right of
suffrage was won in 1920.

The
significance of the Sheppard-Towner Act in progressive and public health
history is in demonstrating that education and preventive care provided through
state and local agencies could have a significant effect on maternal and child
mortality rates.

- - -

Children and the
Law

Legal Aid Society Offices, c.1910

Chicago was to
Progressive-era children's rights advocates what Boston was to antebellum abolitionists.
While neither effort originated in either city, both served as incubators for
movement leadership. Influential individuals from Chicago helped to redefine
childhood and encouraged the passage of new laws regulating children's
health, labor, education, and dependency.

Chicago's
meteoric growth from frontier settlement to modern city paralleled a growing
awareness of the transformed function of childhood and family life in a more
urban and industrialized America. In Some Ethical Gains through Legislation
(1905), Florence Kelley asserted “a right to childhood” that was
being threatened by such change. Kelley and other child welfare advocates were
primarily linked through Jane Addams's and Ellen Gates Starr's Hull House
(1889), located on Chicago's Halsted Street.

Chicago's
influence in the growing national child welfare movement is clear. On March 31,
1905, Chicagoans Jane Addams and Mary McDowell joined Lillian D. Wald, founder
of New York's Henry Street Settlement, and Edward T. Devine, editor of the
journal Charities, for a meeting at the White House with President
Theodore Roosevelt. The group urged Roosevelt to establish a federal bureau to
investigate and report on the nation's youngest citizens. It took seven more
years of lobbying, but President William Howard Taft signed the U.S. Children's
Bureau into law on April 9, 1912, and named as the agency's first chief another
Hull House resident, Julia C. Lathrop. With this appointment, Lathrop became
the first woman to head a federal agency. Many of her staff were trained at the
Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy,
thereby creating a legacy linking Chicago and national child welfare reform.

Although the
U.S. Children's Bureau had no legal authority, it acted as the major lobby for
children at the national, state, and local levels. Lathrop quickly
implemented tactics that she learned while in Chicago. Infants and young
children were dying at alarming rates. Hull House workers had conducted surveys
in an effort to identify the reasons why so many children died of what seemed
to be preventable causes. Beginning in 1915, Lathrop instituted a plan
encouraging states to require birth registration programs. The issuing of birth
certificates led to greater use of physicians and visiting nurses at births,
rather than uncertified midwives. The effort also furthered the establishment
of clean milk distribution centers and child health clinics
for the poor. By 1920 the Children's Bureau had a staff of 196, nearly half of
which (86) were stationed in Chicago.

The U.S.
Children's Bureau's biggest success was passage of the 1921 Sheppard-Towner
Maternity and Infancy Act, which provided federal funds matched by states for
programs designed to reduce the nation's high infant mortality rate. Limited to
education and diagnosis, Sheppard-Towner funds could not be used for direct
medical care. Still, beginning in March 1922, Sheppard-Towner funds paid the
salaries of visiting nurses and provided funds to implement educational
programs and free diagnostic clinics for young children and pregnant women. But
opponents, initially led by the Illinois Medical Association, labeled
Sheppard-Towner socialized medicine, and Congress allowed funding for the
program to expire in 1929. Ironically, since the idea came from Illinois' Julia
Lathrop, Illinois was one of the three states—Connecticut and
Massachusetts were the others—that refused to pass matching funding for
Sheppard-Towner. Nonetheless, in Illinois, the focusing of public attention on
children's health helped increase public spending and reduce the state's infant
mortality rate by 50 percent between 1920 and 1930.

Child labor was
another controversial legal reform connected to birth registration. American
children had always labored. But by the mid-nineteenth century some reformers
argued that working in the nation's mines, streets, and factories harmed
children's health and produced unproductive adults. Massachusetts and
Connecticut passed the nation's first child labor regulations in 1842, limiting
the workday to 10 hours for children under 12 and 14 years of age,
respectively. Illinois followed, making it illegal by 1900 for children under
14 to work for wages. Over the next two decades the successful implementation
of a birth certificate program and a growing labor movement in Illinois and
Chicago focused enforcement on child labor regulations. When Congress passed
the nation's first federal child labor law in 1916 (the Keating-Owen Act),
another Chicago Hull House resident, Grace Abbott, came to Washington to
enforce the legislation. But Abbott returned to Chicago when the U.S. Supreme
Court declared the law unconstitutional in 1918 (Hammer v. Dagenhart,
247 U.S. 251). Abbott returned to Washington in 1921 as the second U.S.
Children's Bureau chief, a position she held until July 1, 1934.

Child labor
regulation and compulsory school attendance laws also went hand in hand. The
first public schools
opened in Chicago in the 1830s. After the Civil War, a parallel system of
largely Catholic parochial schools arose to accommodate the desires of many
immigrant parents. By the 1880s Illinois passed compulsory school attendance
laws for children up to age 14. Birth certificates enabled enforcement, and
Chicago's schools became a symbol of opportunity for immigrant families and
southern African
Americans migrating north. Problems of racial discrimination
endured, and white flight to the suburbs has hampered the effectiveness of
court-ordered school
desegregation since the end of World War II. But compulsory school
attendance requirements have remained an important factor, with the Chicago
Public Schools in the late 1990s instituting required summer attendance for
children with egregiously subpar test scores.

Chicago and
Illinois were also pioneers in the area of child dependency legislation. In
1911 Illinois and Missouri became the first states to enact mothers' pension
laws. Advocates argued that children deprived of a male breadwinner should not
also be deprived of a “normal home life.” Mothers' pensions offered
cash payments so that children could remain in their own homes in the case of a
father's death, desertion, or imprisonment. Lathrop and Abbott promoted the
idea at the national level. By 1921, 40 states had programs similar to Illinois',
and by 1931 only Georgia and South Carolina had no mothers' pension programs.
In 1935, state mothers' pensions were replaced by the Social Security Act's Aid
to Dependent Children program (later, Aid to Families with Dependent Children).
Grace Abbott helped write this seminal legislation.

Children from
families who became totally dependent upon the state for their care were also a
part of Chicago's early efforts. After a 30-year campaign, in 1899 Chicago
reformers established the nation's first state-sanctioned juvenile court.
Reformers argued that children who appeared before the courts were
“handicapped by immaturity of body and mind [and] by a lack of effective
parental control.” Some were dependent due to the death of parents,
others because of physical or mental disabilities, illegitimacy, or socially
unacceptable behavior. Like the mothers' pension movement, juvenile courts
quickly spread throughout the United States. But the application of juvenile
court laws was inconsistent.
Even in Chicago, juvenile court authority has led to a complex bureaucracy.
Reform schools, institutions, and foster care became the primary course of
“treatment,” and efforts focused on individual children rather than
the entire family as originally envisioned.

The very
definition of childhood has been at the heart of legal reforms for children.
Fourteen was generally accepted as the limit of childhood during the nineteenth
century. By 1925 Illinois child welfare advocates had successfully extended the
definition to 16 for juvenile court jurisdiction, many child labor laws, and
minimum age at marriage laws. From 1925 through the 1970s, the legal age of
childhood was generally raised to 18. But since 1980 there has been a growing
ambivalence about children's legal dependency. Debates over appropriate
punishment for juvenile violent offenders and the 1996 Welfare Reform Act's
five-year limitations show that the redefinition of the legal status of
children continues.

Kriste
Lindenmeyer

- - -

The Sheppard-Towner Maternity
and Infancy Protection Act, signed by President Warren G. Harding on November
23, 1921, was the first federal social welfare program created explicitly for
women and children. It was a bridge between pre–World War I Progressive
reform, especially that which organized women's groups championed, and postwar
welfare ideas, as expressed by the "welfare capitalism" of the 1920s,
and in later social programs, such as the New Deal. It was also the first major
political dividend of the recent success of the woman suffrage movement.
Women's organizations protected it as long as they could.

The U.S. CHILDREN'S BUREAU, founded
in 1912, conducted major studies that showed that the United States had very
high rates of infant and maternal mortality. In 1918 the United States was
eleventh in INFANT MORTALITY, and seventeenth in maternal deaths, among
industrialized nations. Eighty percent of all pregnant women received no
prenatal advice or trained care. Bureau researchers also discovered that
poverty and death were closely related. Bureau chief Julia Lathrop championed
maternal and infant protection, and, in altered form, Democratic Senator Morris
Sheppard of Texas and Republican Congressman Horace Towner of Iowa reintroduced
her bill in the sixty-sixth Congress. In the 1920 elections, with full suffrage
for women, the National League of Women Voters pressured the Democratic,
Socialist, Prohibition, and Farmer-Labor parties to endorse the measure in
their platforms; only the Republican Party's platform ignored it, although its
presidential candidate, Warren G. Harding, endorsed the bill. It passed the
U.S. Senate by a 63–7 margin in July, and the House, after considerable
GOP foot dragging and scattered cries of a Communist conspiracy, by a
279–39 margin. Major opponents were the American Medical Association,
such antisuffragist organizations as the Woman Patriots, and politicos in
either major party resentful of woman suffrage and of feminism.

In a decade in which the
United States Bureau of Public Roads spent two billion dollars a year on
highways, the Sheppard-Towner Act hardly seemed extravagant. It authorized
$1,480,000 for fiscal 1921–1922 and $1,240,000 for the next five years,
ending June 30, 1927. Of these sums, $5000 went to each state without
exception, and double that amount went to states offering matching funds. The
Children's Bureau distributed the remainder according to population.
Administrative expenses were limited. Participating states enacted enabling
legislation and implementation plans. The law provided for maternal and infant
hygienic information through nurses, centers, conferences, and mass pamphlets.
Forty-one states joined in 1922. Only three never did. In 1929 Congressional
opponents torpedoed the bill, and President Hoover let it lapse with wan
endorsements.

Between 1922 and 1929, the
Children's Bureau conducted 183,252 conferences, established 2,978 prenatal
care units, visiting nurses made 3,131,996 home visits, and 22,020,489
pamphlets had been passed out. America's infant and maternal death rates fell
by 16 percent and 12 percent, respectively, but these were still twice what New
Zealand and Great Britain experienced in the same years.

- - -

It has to do with Maritime
Admiralty Law. Maritime admiralty is banking law & it says that because you
were born from your mother's water you are an admiralty product. This is why
ships sit in births and they are tied to the dock and the captain has to give a
certificate of manifest to the port authority. This is why when you were born
you have to have a birth certificate. It's got to be signed by the
"doc" (doctor) cause that's where the ship is tied to, the dock. Why
does the doctor sign your birth certificate? Because you came down your
mother's water canal ergo you are a maritime admiralty product and that's the
Law! Your birth certificate is signed by your mother and next time look at it
and you will see that it does not say parent or mother, it says, "informant".
Your mother was informing the banks that she has just produced another PRODUCT
to be bought and sold. So, with your name in all capital letters, you are
recognized not as a natural person, but as a corporation, or product. Welcome
to America!

- - -

"Signature Without
Liability Primer" [PDF] by Michael H. Keehn...

In short, a government
issued birth certificate is issued with consent of one parent at the time
of birth. The birth certificate is sent to a government agency, generally the
Bureau of Vital Statistics. Here, another ‘birth certificate’ is
issued, this one spelling the name of the baby in all capital letters, creating
a fictional entity (strawman or trade name). If the name on the birth certificate
were to represent the baby as a natural individual, it would be spelled with
the appropriate upper and lower case lettering. For example, John Quincy Adams,
not JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. The all capitals spelling of the name creates a
corporate fiction (a strawman, a trade name), which the government can regulate
and control.

With the issuance of a birth
certificate on this fictional character, this strawman or trade
name is placed into international commerce. The government issues a bond on
the birth certificate in the amount of $630,000 (today’s value), and the
bond is sold on a securities exchange. It is always purchased by the same
corporation, the Federal Reserve Bank. Through some trickery and deception, the
baby becomes the surety which guarantees the payback of the bond. The trick is
to get the baby to volunteer to pay... all of his (or her) life.
And that is what the following essay is about... how to avoid becoming liable
for a fictional strawman or trade name that was a creation of
government for the purpose defrauding the individual (the baby).

To be more specific, a second
"negotiable instrument" is drawn on the value of the first that is
held by the state, which is then bought and so "accepted for value"
and then held by the Depository Trust Corporation. (Also see "Who Is Running America?".)

Negotiable Instruments include
'Promissory Notes', 'Bills of Exchange', 'Letters of credit', 'Bills of
lading', 'Securities'
(such as stocks and bonds) as in the "security of the person",
'Deeds' and 'IOUs'.

It goes on...

With the issuance of a birth
certificate on this fictional character, this strawman or trade
name is placed into international commerce. The government issues a bond on
the birth certificate in the amount of $630,000 (today’s value), and the
bond is sold on a securities exchange. It is always purchased by the same
corporation, the Federal Reserve Bank. Through some trickery and deception, the
baby becomes the surety which guarantees the payback of the bond. The trick is
to get the baby to volunteer to pay... all of his (or her) life.
And that is what the following essay is about... how to avoid becoming liable
for a fictional strawman or trade name that was a creation of
government for the purpose defrauding the individual (the baby).

A little more detailed information...

When a child is born, the hospital generally sends the
original, not a copy, of this record of live birth to the State Bureau of Vital
Statistics, sometimes called the Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services (HRS). Each STATE is required to supply the corporate UNITED STATES
with birth, death, and health statistics. The STATE agency that receives the original
record of live birth keeps it and then issues another Birth Certificate
in a different form where the name of the baby is spelled in ALL CAPITAL
LETTERS. This creates a ‘legal person’ as opposed to a natural
individual.

The Birth Certificate issued by the State is then registered
with the U.S. Department of Commerce - - the Executive Office - specifically
through their own sub-agency, the U.S. Census Bureau, which is responsible to
register vital statistics from all the states. Thus, the birth certificate
is registered in international commerce. The word registered,
as it is used in commercial law, does not mean that the ALL CAPITAL version of
the name was "merely" noted or recorded in a book for future
reference purposes. When a birth certificate is registered
with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Treasury will issue a bond on the
value of the birth certification. That bond is then made available for
purchase on a securities exchange and is bought by the Federal Reserve
Bank. This purchase then become the authority or collateral to issue Federal
Reserve Notes, which we use as a medium of exchange.

The value of the bond in today’s world is $630,000. The
bond is then held in trust for the Federal Reserve at the Depository Trust
Corporation at 55 Water Street in New York City, about two blocks down the
street from the Federal Reserve. It is a high-rise office building and the sign
in front reads: “The Tower of Power.”

This process creates a burden in that the ALL-CAPITAL legal
person named on the birth certificate has become a surety,
or guarantor, a condition and obligation that is automatically and
unwittingly assumed unless you rebut the presumption by effectively noticing
government.

“Guarantor. Person who becomes secondarily liable for
another’s debt or performance... One who promises to answer for the debt,
default or miscarriage of another.” - Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth
Edition

From this it is easy to conclude that the baby is to assume
the liability for any burden created or associated with the strawman or trade
name listed on the birth certificate.

- - -

Birth Certificate Truth

The
Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) is one of a number of uniform acts that have been
promulgated in conjunction with efforts to harmonize the law of sales and other
commercial transactions in all 50 states within the United States of America.
The Uniform Commercial Code is looked upon as the bible in the world of
business. Under Caeser of Rome, it was established that all nations in the
empire that do any form of business, should all play on a level field, but what
is not told is that the UCC is based directly on Vatican Canon Law, of the
Roman Canon Law, which means, its regulations are under the Roman Catholic
Church. Now, you maybe wondering what this has to do with birth certificates,
so let's break down the origin of birth certificates.

Question:
What is a berth? To come into or dock at a wharf such as when a ship comes into
a dock, it arrives. So consequently, when a ship pulls into a port, it pulls in
and stops, that is called its berth, because the ship has now arrived. So
because it is on the laws of the high seas, it is governed by the UCC
Commercial Law. So when the ship pulls in to it's berth, the first thing the
captain must do is to present a certificate of manifest to the port
authorities. What is a certificate of manifest? It is a document listing a ship’s
contents, cargo, crew, and passengers. So whatever the ship brings in at berth,
the captain has to present a certificate of manifest showing the identity and
value of the items on the ship. Now consequently, when people are born, they
come out of their mother's water, therefore they must have a birth certificate,
which is a certificate of manifest, because the people are considered a
corporation owned item, they are a human resource. This goes back to the German
Nazi concept, that every human coming out of their mother's water must be
birthed, and therefore the people have to have a certificate of manifest, to
see who this individual is and how much they are going to make for the
government in their New World Order.

So,
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 the people 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. Why do you think when you call to see if a company is
hiring, you have to go through a division known as Human Resource? The people
are resources to the government, their birth certificates are a security on the
New York Stock Exchange, which is why if you look at all birth certificate's in
America, it will say at the bottom this is printed on security paper, do not
accept if not on full color security paper. At the bottom, you will always have
a series of numbers, red numbers printed on the birth certificate, in which
those numbers are a security stock exchange number on the World Stock Exchange,
in which the American people are worth money to the International Bank that
bought the government in the 1930's.

Governmental
assignment of a dollar value to the heads of citizens in America 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. See the
government knows that they can only extract so much money out of the economy,
so their idea is to bankrupt private owners so that the banks who are behind
this syndicate become the owners of all the assets in this country. That's the
real scheme; that's the real motive. By encouraging Congress to spend money it
doesn't have, Congress has to turn around and "lien" on American
labor and American private property for collateral. See they do that by
fraudulent conversion of birth certificates, for example. Doctors, who are
franchisees of the state, are obliged to sign birth certificates and forward
them on to the Secretary of State in Sacramento. They make certified copies and
forward those birth certificates to the Department of Commerce in Washington,
D.C. The Department of Commerce does the same thing: they make certified copies
and forward them on to the International Monetary Fund in Brussels, Belgium.

Now
this is the center of the hub of the banking syndicate and they are, of course,
loaning these huge sums to various governments around the world, including the
Congress of the United States. The Congress needs something for collateral, and
what they use for collateral are these birth certificates. They get treated as
certificates in equity which mature on the 18th birthday of the person whose
name appears on the birth certificate. The bank then keeps track of these and
uses the number that any particular nation has available, as collateral on the
international debt, as "performance units" on the international debt.
These certificates in equity end up being regarded as "performance
units" on the international debt. The more of those you have, the more
money you can borrow. It's like this: the more collateral I have, the more
money I can borrow from banks and the more I can secure. So, governments are securing
their international debt by "liening" on the persons and property of
their citizens. They're doing this on a massive scale, and it's technically a
fraudulent conversion of the birth certificate because, if they did that with
your birth certificate, they never told you they were doing it. They never told
you they were obtaining a lien on your person and starting a third-party debt
that you're responsible for. You had no meaningful choice in the matter, which
makes it an "unconscionable contract" by definition.

Think
of it very simply, as walking into a department store and saying to the
salesman, "I really like that refrigerator over there, I want to buy it,
ship it to my home tomorrow, and send the bill to, say, Willy Brown." So
the next day, the refrigerator ends up in your garage, and the bill ends up in
Willy Brown's mail. Willy Brown opens his mail and says, "What's this,
Sears? One refrigerator, $800? What is this? I didn't buy this. I'm not a party
to this transaction. I didn't even know about it. Why are they billing me?
There must be a mistake here." Well, this is kind of like what is
happening now. In this example, the department store is the Federal Reserve.
They're supplying Federal Reserve Notes, right? Willy Brown is the American people,
and I -- the one who went in there and bought the refrigerator in the first
place -- I represent Congress. And I'm saying, "Don't send the bill to me,
send it to the American people. And you can lien on their property, by the way.
You can use our police, we'll enforce it for you; we'll extract the
money." So that's the fraud the government and Obama is keeping from the
American people.

The fraud is that Congress bankrupted the U.S.
Treasury and turned all their gold over to the Federal Reserve banks, which are
not federal government agencies.

The
Federal Reserve is a "municipal corporation" created by an act of
Congress, but it's still a corporation. And all that gold is now in their
hands. But there wasn't enough to discharge the debt that had accumulated up to
1933. They had to go into bankruptcy to discharge the rest of the debt. They're
using standard federal bankruptcy rules for this, but the creditors, of course,
are in charge. And they're back there telling Congress, "Go ahead,
continue spending more money that you don't have, because we know we'll take it
out of the land and the labor of the American people, ultimately." And
that's what's going on. Look at the current economic situation, the government
is using Obama to push this idea concept of stimulus checks as a way for
slowing down inflation, creating jobs, and giving the American people more
money to spend. Now to the average puppet, this doesn't seem like a bad idea,
but what the government doesn't tell the people is that, in the process of them
giving these stimulus checks for the American people to spend more money, it
will only devalue the American Dollar, and the banks will close up, because how
can you spend more in a recession to boost the economy? Therefore by the banks
closing up, it will force the American people into a one way electronic
spending money system, that will be monitored and administered by the
government, forcing the people into compliance with their New World Order.

Today
we are defined as human resources, believed to be owned by the government. The
government now wants us, as individuals, to be tagged and tracked. Government
mandated or legislated National I.D. is unconstitutional anyway you look at it.
Federal jurisdiction to legislate for the several states does not exist. They
have no legislation for ordering you to have a identification card, health
card, and so forth, but they know the people are ignorant to the Law, so
therefore by ignorance of the people, the government is allowed to freely at
will keep coming up with forms of taxation against the American people. Birth
Certificates proves that you are national property of the International Banks.
The birth certificate thus becomes a form of theft, the theft of the
child’s true identity as a free child of God to a servant of the State.
By affixing a national seal of approval to a child, the state denies the
freedom, rights, and dignity that God has ordained in the scriptures. You don't
need proof that you were born, you breathing is proof enough for these
hypocrites. By requiring a license, the state is claiming complete control and
ownership over your liberty, and property. Christ's assembly does not exist on
paper, but in the hearts of men, and is expressed in their outward acts.
Because there is no breath of Life from God in such pieces of paper, we should
not look to them for any authority for doing anything. Christ is our authority
for doing the things we do.

Now
ask yourself, have you ever, in your entire life, "signed" your name
in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS? Of course not! Haven’t you always used both upper
and lower case letters to sign your name? Yes. And why is that? Because that is
what you have been taught since a child. Because the standard Rule of Law
governing the use of English Grammar states that the correct Capitalization of
Proper Names must begin with a capital letter, and the rest of the name must be
spelled in smaller case letters. At Law, this lets others know you are an
entity created by God, and not an entity created by man. Now, there are
entities created by man, Corporations for example. Corporations are known as
"persons" created by the government. They are created on a piece of
paper and brought into existence by the government. To differentiate between
those created by God and those created by the government, those created by the
government have their names spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. This lets others
know that this entity does not have a body, soul, and spirit like man has, but
that this is a fictitious entity created for the purpose of making a profit.

Now,
if you look at a license, or ID Card or Birth Certificate, you will notice the
name that appears on it is spelled in all capital letters! What this means, at
law, is that the entity that is named on this license is a creature of the
government, and not a creature of God. It means that entity is a servant of
Caesar, and not a servant of God. Send your birth certificate back to the government
or your state, and follow the path of freedom which is in the Most High.
Shalom!

- - -

The
Strawman Redemption

Meet
your straw man as a child, you have had a imaginary friend. You may be surprised to learn that evidence exists
that you have had a make believe twin from the time your mother and father
permitted a birth certificate to be filed on you.

This make-believe is not real, but artificial. It is a straw man, an artificial
entity that has a name very similar to yours. here is a definition of strawman
"A front ; a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a
transaction. Nominal party to a transaction..........[ Blacks Law
Dictionary,6th Edition] "The term is also used in commercial and property
contexts when a transfer is made to a party, the straw man, simply for the
purpose of retransferring to the transferor in order to accomplish some purpose
not otherwise permitted. "[ Barron's 3rd Edition] So in layman's terms,
what is a strawman?

The
straw man is a artificial person. The strawman was created by law shortly after
you were born via the registration for your birth certificate. The name for the
straw man iS your name in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. You will notice that the
inscription on the birth certificate is your name in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. The
English language has precise rules of grammar that make no provision for
writing proper nouns in all-capital letters. So your name spelled in all
capital letters is a fictitious name. Your strawman has a same-sounding name as
your name, but is a artificial entity which exists only "by force of or in
contemplation of law."

The all caps name is not your "true name" which consists of the given
(Christian) name plus the surname (family name). and appears with only initial
letters capitalized. The all caps version of your name is a TRADE NAME, the
name under which you do business. We may also say that the straw man is a
person according to the legal dictionary. person. 1. a human being. 2. an
entity ( such as a corporation) that is recognized by law as having rights and
duties of a human being ......."Blacks Law Dictionary, 7th Edition]
The strawman may also said to be an "artificial person" which is also
defined in the legal dictionary. "an entity, such as a corporation,
created by law and given certain legal rights and duties of a human being; a
being, real or imaginary, who for the purpose of legal reasoning is treated
more or less as an human being.----also termed fictitious person: juristic
person; legal person; moral person. [Blacks Law Dictionary)

- - -

Sheppard-Towner Maternity and
Infancy Protection Act of 1921t

Strawman, artificial person, birth certificate, fictional person,
redemption book

Legalities of All-Capital-Letters Names (your drivers license)

Redemption
Book- First Step to Becoming a Secured Party Creditor

TradeNameBinder
Birth Certificate Truth
Birth Certificates = Fictional Entities1

Sheppard-Towner
Maternity Act - Google Search

Sheppard-Towner Maternity and Infancy Act - Encyclopedia of
Children and Childhood in History and Society

Sheppard-Towner Maternity and Infancy Protection Act
Information from Answers.com

Birth Certificate - a type of 'negotiable instrument' CommonLaw

Structure of the Birth Certificate                              The Strawman
Strawman Video

For sources on any article, search internet
for

a “quoted phrase” from the
document

To learn how go here:
www.abodia.com/1/Search.htm

Here
is a good but simple article on How the Federal
Reserve owns You through your Birth Certificate

forming
a bond and or a bank note.  https://viewzone2.com/collateralx.html