Some believe, and have claimed, that the birth record is a “foundling certificate” though no reference supporting this claim has been made or advanced beyond mere speculation. However, when we look at how the term foundling is defined, we find it refers to a deserted or exposed infant; a child found without a parent or owner.” (Webster’s 1828 @ 175) A similar definition is found in Black’s Law 4th, which defines the term as “A deserted or exposed infant; a child found without a parent or guardian, its relatives being unknown.” (Black’s Law 4th @ pg. 785)
We can see that in no respect does the birth documents support a foundling theory, and the Identification of Newborn, described in the post on the Identification of Newborn, disproves the required element of abandonment, or the parents being unknown. Additionally, a review of the records show that there is no grant of the child, no intent to abandon the child, and in fact no other evidence which would be required for the child to be deemed a foundling. Add to this that the child is sent home with its parents and not to a foundling house or foundling hospital and the view of a foundling certificate is fully rebutted.
Another myth, though less popular, is that the birth certificate is a form of corporate membership certificate. This is based on the fact the States, Counties, Municipalities, and Shires have all been incorporated. However, though the incorporation of the various levels of State have been made, the fact that each man and woman is sovereign at birth and by natural right, there is no authority to relegate this sovereignty or these natural rights to a lesser position of member as opposed to Director of a corporation.
When we also consider that membership to a corporation must be set out in the corporate charter, as are the rights and duties of each member; and the fact these corporate charters identifying the members must be filed with the Secretary of State, and no such charter or filing is made, this myth is revealed as just another myth.
Even if we view the corporation membership myth from the perspective of the birth certificate being a type of shareholder certificate, with a little consideration we will find that the birth certificate can not stand as a shareholder certificate either. This is so because a shareholder certificate must, by law, show the amount of shares of stock which are held by the certificate holder, must be signed by at least the Treasurer of the company but often is signed by the President and Secretary as well. The share or stock certificate can also be bought and sold.
None of these aspects are present on the birth certificate, disqualifying the birth certificate from being a shareholder or stock certificate.
One final myth we will dispel is that the Birth certificate is a bond, with millions, and potentially billions, of dollars attached to it. Similar to the myth of dragons having its basis in corrupted fact, this myth also is based on a mix of corrupted facts.
The first corrupt fact this myth is based on is that the Birth Certificate is printed on “bond paper” and therefore is a bond. Similarly, some researchers have bolstered this myth with the corrupt fact the Birth Certificate has printed on its face similar “ribbon” printing as some bonds do. Ergo, the Birth Certificate is a bond.
Though the Birth Certificate is printed on bond paper, the fact bond paper is not regulated as other specialty papers are strips the significance from this claim, and reveals the corruption of this simple truth. For example, the paper used to print Federal Reserve Bank Notes is highly regulated and monitored to combat fraud through counterfeiting. By comparison, bond paper is not regulated. One can go down to their local Staples Center and purchase as much bond paper as they can carry, haul, and store
Similarly, though the Birth Certificate does have “ribbon” printing on its face, and though a similar type of ribbon design does appear on the face of some bonds, and can be found on Federal Reserve Bank Notes, the fact such “ribbon” printing is used on a wide variety of documents, such as Certificates of Achievement, Certificates of Accomplishment, Scholastic Achievement Certificates, and Death Certificates all strip the significance from this claim, and reveals the corruption of this simple truth.
Of specific interest in the above examples of other non-bond documents is the Death Certificate. This document, and the Marriage Certificate, are explored more thoroughly in separate posts; however the fact neither of these documents are bonds, nor claimed to be bonds by proponents of this myth, though they are designed identically, also dispels this myth.
A final word on the “ribbon” printing. Though such decoration is not essential to a bond, as evidenced by the various forms and designs of bonds today, and over times past, the fact the “ribbon” decoration is consistently maintained on the Certificate of Live Birth, the Birth Certificate, the Death Certificate, and the Marriage Certificate suggests this decoration is significant. This much is acknowledged by the proponents of the bond myth.
Were we to simply look at the design alone, and to nothing else, it would be and is easy to see the logic in the argument in favor of this myth. However, as noted above, because the Certificate of Live Birth, Death Certificate, and Marriage Certificate are not claimed to be bonds; and as there is no evidence there is any monetary value associated with any of these documents, there must be another reason for the intricate decoration.
Few researchers have viewed these decorations from the perspective of Heraldry. However, when these documents are viewed from the perspective of Heraldry, they very quickly take on a much deeper significance. A significance far beyond the erroneous assumption of bonds and negotiable instruments. In separate posts we explore the Certificate of Live Birth, Birth Certificate, Death Certificate, and Marriage Certificate with Heraldry as our lens, and see with fresh eyes the deeper implications held by these documents.
Finally, the corrupted truth of the monetary value of the Birth Certificate must be addressed. The truth is that there is in fact millions of dollars associated with the Birth Certificate. Anyone who has taken the time to find the CUSIP Number associated with their Birth Certificate knows well the value reported under the CUSIP Number.
For those not certain what the CUSIP number is, this is an acronym which stands for Committee on Uniform Securities Identification Procedures. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the CUSIP Number “identifies most financial instruments, including: stocks of all registered U.S. and Canadian companies, commercial paper, and U.S. government and municipal bonds. The CUSIP system (formally known as CUSIP Global Services)—owned by the American Bankers Association and managed by Standard & Poor’s—facilitates the clearance and settlement process of securities.CUSIP numbers consist of nine characters (including letters and numbers) that uniquely identify a company or issuer and the type of financial instrument. A similar system is used to identify foreign securities (CUSIP International Numbering System or CINS). CINS employs the same nine character identifier as CUSIP, but also contains a letter in the first position to signify the issuer’s country or geographic region.
However, the value reported under the CUSIP Number is not due to the Birth certificate being a bond one can monetize, but stems from the Estate the Birth Certificate is associated with. The Birth Certificate is without intrinsic value. Its value is extrinsic, and derives from the Estate. This is one of the reasons the hundreds of attempts to monetize the Birth Certificate, or “cash out”, have met with frustration, rejection, and denial. Though this fuels those who would rather spin fearmongering, government conspiracies, and similar “reasoning” for why their “process” failed, the failure derives from a lack of comprehension; and a failure to do the appropriate thing with regards to the Estate.
An example may help to clarify the issue and to crystalize the truth which has become corrupted. Consider the following scenario: Tom issues a draft order, also known as a personal check, drawn upon the Bank of America. The draft order alone is without any intrinsic value. If Tom does not have funds in the account the draft is worthless. The draft has extrinsic value based on the underlying trust account with Bank of America.
Tom gives the draft order to Mark, but does not tell Mark that due to fraud protection, Mark can not redeem the draft order until the bank contacts Tom to confirm the identity of the holder. Mark takes the draft order to the bank, but the bank teller tells Mark the draft order, “can not be honored at this time.” However, the teller does not choose to explain the fraud protection to Mark, since to do so may inform a potential fraudster of the protection, allowing them to devise a scheme to circumvent the protection.
Mark, having experienced rejection, assumes that Tom has defrauded him; or that the bank teller simply did not want to do their job; or maybe the bank teller did not like Mark. None of these presumptions are true. Since the occurrences of identity theft have become so prolific, such fraud protection systems have been applied to Credit Cards, bank accounts, and other financially sensitive holdings. However, this fraud protection system simply mimics the system already employed for over 150 years to protect the Estate and its assets.