An Unalienable Right - Page 6 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Any other minor ideologies.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15156504
ingliz wrote:By what measure?


:lol:


By EVERY metric

Agriculture:

Cotton Gin - invented by Eli Whitney.
Reaper - invented by Cyrus McCormick.
Winnowing Barn - invented in South Carolina.
Nitrogen Cycle Crop Rotation - invented by George Washington Carver.

Electrical Appliances:

Telegraph - invented by Samuel Morse.
Telephone - invented by Alexander Graham Bell.
Power Plant - invented by Thomas Edison.
Electric Grill - invented by Thomas Edison.
2-Sided Grill - invented by Michael Boehm.
Toaster - invented by Thomas Edison.
Light Bulb - invented by Thomas Edison.
Electric Searchlight - invented by Thomas Edison.
Electric Fan - invented by Thomas Edison.
Air-Conditioning - invented by Willis De Havilland Carrier.
Electric Refrigerator - invented by Nathaniel B. Wales.
Electric Washing Machine - invented by Oliver B Woodrow.
Electric Dryer - invented by J. Ross Moore.
Blender - invented by Stephen J. Poplowski.
Ironing Board - invented by Elijah McCoy.
Quick Fryer - invented by Colonel Sanders.
Microwave Oven - invented by Percy Spencer.
2-Sided Grill - invented by Michael Boehm.

Other:

Oil Pipeline - invented by John D. Rockefeller.
Oil-Futures - invented by John D. Rockefeller.
First Practical Electric Train - invented by Thomas Edison.
First Practical Dry Cell Battery - invented by Thomas Edison.
First Practical Wet Cell Battery - invented by Thomas Edison.
Record Players - invented by Thomas Edison.
Cinema - invented by Thomas Edison.
Steel Reinforced Skyscraper - built by William LeBaron Jenney.
Steel Reinforced Poured Concrete Structures - invented by Thomas Edison.
Airplane - invented by the Wright Brothers.
Aerodynamic Streamlining - invented by William McKeen.
High Speed Gasoline Bullet Train - invented by William McKeen.
Moving Assembly Line and Affordable Cars and Trucks - invented by Henry Ford.
Diesel Powered Bulk Carrier Ship - the first bulkers with diesel propulsion began to appear in 1911 in the United States.
Diesel Train - invented by Thomas Edison.
Fax Machine - invented by Richard H. Ranger.
Radio Broadcasting - invented by David Sarnoff.
Electronic Television - invented by Philo Farnsworth.
Television Broadcasting - invented by David Sarnoff.
High Speed Electric Bullet Train - invented by Donald R. Dohner and Raymond Loewy.
High Speed Electric Bullet Freight Train - invented by Donald R. Dohner and Raymond Loewy.
Helicopter - invented by Igor Sikorsky.
Nuclear Fission Reactor - invented by Enrico Fermi.
Atomic Bomb - invented by Robert Oppenheimer.
Hydrogen Bomb - invented by Edward Teller.
Transistor - invented by John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, and William Shockley.
Industrial Robot - invented by George Devol.
Prosthetics - invented by George Devol.
Walking Dragline Excavator Big Muskie - invented by Bucyrus-Erie.
Cable TV - invented by John Walson.
Satellite Communications - invented by Howard Hughes.
Moon Landing - Saturn V and Apollo rockets designed by Wernher Von Braun and the Lunar Lander designed by Tom Kelley.

Digital Technology:

Digital Alarm Clock - invented by D.E Protzmann.
GPS - invented by Roger L. Easton.
Handheld Calculator - invented by Jack Kilby.
CCD Digital Electronic Video Camera - invented by Willard S. Boyle and George E. Smith.
Digital Wristwatch - invented by John Bergey.
Digital Electronic Still Camera - invented by Steven Sasson.
Universal Remote Control - invented by Steve Wozniak.
Digital TV - invented by General Instrument.

Cellphone:

Cellphone - invented by Martin Cooper.
Smartphone - invented by Frank J. Canova.
Camera Phone - invented by Eric Fossum.
CMOS Image Sensor - invented by Eric Fossum.

Computer Technology:

Transistor - William Shockley
Electromechanical Arcade Game - the first electromechanical arcade game, called Contact, was invented by Harry Williams.
Light Gun Arcade Game - the first light gun arcade game, called the Seeburg Ray-O-Lite, was invented in the US.
Monitor - invented by IBM.
Hard Drive - invented by IBM.
Computer Keyboard - invented by Thomas W. Slebodnik and Frank J. Rau.
Scanner - invented by Russell Kirsch.
Computer Stylus - invented by Tom Dimond.
Optical Video Disc - invented by David Paul Gregg.
Computer Mouse - invented by Douglas Engelbart.
Touch Screen - invented by EA Johnson.
Integrated Circuit - invented by Jack Kilby.
Video Games - invented by Ralph H. Baer.
Internet - invented by Robert Taylor and Lawrence Roberts.
Arcade Game - invented by Nolan Bushnell and Ted Dabney.
Wireless Internet - invented by Norman Abramson.
Microprocessor - invented by Marcian Hoff, Stanley Mazor, and Frederico Faggin.
Laptop PC - invented by Paul Friedl.
Desktop PC - invented by Steve Jobs.
PDA - the GridPad, the first touchscreen PDA computer was invented by Jeff Hawkins.
E-mail - invented by Jerry Yang and David Filo.
Search Engine - invented by Jerry Yang and David Filo.
WebTV - invented by Steve Perlman.
Social Networking - invented by Andrew Weinreich.
Online Video Hosting Service - invented by Chase Norlin.
Tablet PC - invented by Bill Gates.
Tablet/Laptop Hybrid PC - invented by Bill Gates.


The United States has sent more missionaries out into the world than any other country. According to one source:

"The United States sends more Christian missionaries abroad than any other country. According to Todd Johnson, director of the Center for the Study of Global Christianity, in 2010 the United States sent out 127,000 of the world’s estimated 400,000 missionaries. To put this in perspective, second-place Brazil sent 34,000."

https://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/dr-jame ... t%2034,000.

It was the United States that started the United Nations (and pays more into it than any other country):

"The United States remains the largest donor to the United Nations, contributing roughly $10 billion in 2018, slightly less than one-fifth of the body’s collective budget." https://www.cfr.org/article/funding-uni ... d-programs

The United States built the world's largest military and had more men, more ships, and a more technology than any nation that existed prior to that. Additionally, that massive military complex was constructed in less than 300 years, starting with just over 100 people that landed at Plymouth Rock in 1620. They did more in that period of time than the Roman Empire accomplished in 1,000 years (1,500 depending upon which historian you rely on). We've fought in more wars and sacrificed more of our citizenry to secure Liberty and Freedom than virtually all other countries of the world combined and we've never taken an acre of land for ourselves while doing so.

The people of the United States have conquered the seas, conquered the skies, and conquered space; they have outpaced the rest of the world with their contributions to science, medicine, transportation, communication, and, of course, became the only country in the world that guaranteed the Rights of the People in a contract called the Constitution of the United States.

And, as shitty as we've become - consuming over 80 percent of the world's opioid supply; having more people in prison than any country in the world both in raw numbers as well as per capita; and having more cases of Covid 19 than any country in the world, the masses come to the United States. We have more undocumented foreigners in the United States than any country in the world; we naturalize over 750,000 new citizens per year (more than any other country on the face of the earth) and people are still walking across entire countries to get here. We were the first place in the modern era to outlaw slavery.

If I keep going, this is going to be one Hell of a long post. The bottom line is, the rest of the world stands in line to come to the United States. The Black people have an agenda to take this piece of real estate and their battle cry is "Keep your eye on the prize." Like it or not, the United States has something going for it. And every country on this planet relies on the United States for something - and that cannot be said for any other country that has ever existed.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15156509
The Resister wrote:If I keep going, this is going to be one Hell of a long post. The bottom line is, the rest of the world stands in line to come to the United States. The Black people have an agenda to take this piece of real estate and their battle cry is "Keep your eye on the prize." Like it or not, the United States has something going for it. And every country on this planet relies on the United States for something - and that cannot be said for any other country that has ever existed.


Sadly, the left wingers and SJWs think we are in hell. As Steven Pinker said in his book Enlightenment we are getting better all the time.
#15156522
@The Resister ;


1) I do not have an animus toward legitimate government (quite aware of Romans 13)


When legitimate government is doing only what is right and just for the people, you do have an animus if you resist that action. And being ''aware of Romans 13'', you should know that.

2) I have shared with the people here in previous threads the court holdings relative to the Right to keep and bear Arms. If you are too lazy to go back and READ those posts, I have a scripture to share with you: Proverbs 18 : 13


Again, I read your posts. One does not have an unalienable right to bear arms that is separate from being part of the organized and well-regulated militia that defends the country from enemies foreign and domestic. Read the whole 2nd Amendment;


''A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed''


Well regulated. For the Security of a free State.

3) It doesn't matter about what the English Common Law says. We used their precedents as a beginning for establishing our own. AFTER our courts interpreted the Constitution, the precedents of our courts became mandatory authority. English Common Law is only persuasive authority and is generally used when our own rulings are incomplete, vague, etc. You should have been here a hundred posts ago as I'm not feeding that ego driven troll with a God complex any longer. God Bless.


Sure it matters, because what it decided was carried over into our own legal rulings after the revolution. Ever heard of ''Eminent Domain''? There is not an absolute title or right to private property in the United States, and never has been.

Government is what enables and defends or restricts or prohibits the private ownership of property to begin with, God did not grant the ''unalienable right'' to private property to us, it is a thing of men. Recall in Scripture;


''Someone in the crowd said to Him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.” But Jesus replied, “Man, who appointed Me judge or executor between you?”


Gospel of St. Luke, Chapter 12:13.
#15156523
It's possible someone has already mentioned this, because this is the kind of thread where you can fall asleep while wading through the tedious arguments and forget what came up, but:

'inalienable' and 'unalienable' mean the same thing. The first use in English of "unalienable" was in 1611, when it was used to translate from French "inalienable" in Cotgrave's "A Dictionary of the French and English Tongues" (OED, whose entire definition of "unalienable" is "= inalienable adj.").

When drafting the Declaration of Independence, different people used different spellings:

The final version of the Declaration uses the word "unalienable." Some earlier drafts used the word "inalienable," which is the term our modern dictionaries prefer. The two words mean precisely the same thing.

According to The American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style from Houghton Mifflin Company:

The unalienable rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence could just as well have been inalienable, which means the same thing. Inalienable or unalienable refers to that which cannot be given away or taken away.
Here is a listing of known versions of the Declaration, showing which word is used:

The Declaration on parchment, now in the Department of State unalienable
The Declaration as written out in the corrected Journal unalienable
The Declaration as printed by Dunlap under the order of Congress unalienable
The draft of the Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in The American Philosophical Society, in Philadelphia inalienable
The Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in the New York Public Library inalienable
The draft of the Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in the Massachusetts Historical Society, in Boston inalienable
The copy in the handwriting of John Adams of the "Rough draught" of the Declaration, now at the Massachusetts Historical Society. unalienable
In a footnote in "The Declaration of Independence: A Study in the History of Political Ideas" by Carl Lotus Becker, published 1922, we learn:

The Rough Draft reads "[inherent &] inalienable." There is no indication that Congress changed "inalienable" to "unalienable"; but the latter form appears in the text in the rough Journal, in the corrected Journal, and in the parchment copy. John Adams, in making his copy of the Rough Draft, wrote " unalienable." Adams was one of the committee which supervised the printing of the text adopted by Congress, and it may have been at his suggestion that the change was made in printing. "Unalienable" may have been the more customary form in the eighteenth century.

https://www.ushistory.org/declaration/d ... nable.html

So all the faff about 'inalienable' replacing 'unalienable' a century later is just nonsense. Which set the tone nicely for this thread.
User avatar
By ingliz
#15156526
The Resister wrote:Reaper

Wrong!

The first documented reaping machine was the Gallic reaper that was used in modern-day France during Roman times.

Winnowing Barn

Wrong!

The Chinese mechanised winnowing with the development of the rotary winnowing fan. This can be seen in Wang Zhen's book the Nong Shu (1313 AD).

Nitrogen Cycle Crop Rotation - invented by George Washington Carver.

Wrong!

Farmers in the region of Waasland (in present-day northern Belgium) pioneered a four-field rotation in the early 16th century.

Blah, blah, rhubarb, blah

Can't be arsed with the rest but I will leave you with this.

We were the first place in the modern era to outlaw slavery.

Wrong!

In 1804, Haiti (then Saint-Domingue) became the first sovereign nation in the Western Hemisphere to unconditionally abolish slavery in the modern era.

The U.S. abolished slavery in 1865 with the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.


:lol:
User avatar
By Drlee
#15156538
American exceptionalism. I believe America is an exceptional country. We have many accomplishments. We are a nation with a proud list of accomplishments. I looked at your list. Did you notice the number of immigrants on there? And if you add children of immigrants that is about the whole list.

And, by the way, Sarnoff, (thank God this Russian Jew decided to come here) did not "invent radio broadcasting" but he was a pioneer in early broadcasting aimed at a mass audience. Frank Conrad actually made the first commercial broadcast reporting on the election.

But here is the thing. A country is like a professional golfer. Everyday when it wakes up it has to prove itself all over again. It may get some money from past glories but to be a winner it has to win today.

This is a problem and both the left(ish) and right have forgotten it. The lef(ish) want to dwell on the sins of the past and the right wants to dwell on the glories of the past and neither of them can set aside their petty differences to make America glorious or less sinful today. This is one place where I at least agreed with Trump's slogan. America is not as great as it once was. Many of you have seen this before but it is worth three minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16K6m3Ua2nw

It is the unvarnished truth. The very idea that we have our citizens in the right arming to overthrow the government while on the left they are taking Washington's name off schools because he owned slaves and Abraham Lincoln's name off of schools because he offended Native Americans shows the world just how much trouble we are in. A LOT.

This is not a time for us to be whining about anything nor is it a time for us to be crowing about past successes. We are in a serious trick bag and it may take a MAN on a horse to keep us from killing each other in large numbers. Or worse, in flailing around for a way out of civil war we may wind up in a world war.

I proudly served my country for 20 years. I do not need to wear a flag pin to prove my patriotism. But as I watched our government standby and do next to nothing, in fact outright lie about it, while 400K people died a miserable death I could see that we were in very bad trouble indeed. And it is getting worse by the day.

No. This is no time for braggadocio. It IS time for us to man-up, put our differences aside and try to fix this mess before it is too late.

@The Resister You posted your crowing list for all the world to see. They know very well what an amazing record of accomplishment the US has. Do you know what else the word sees? Our former president stands impeached twice. Our capital was overrun by right-wing insurrectionists with the president's at least tacit approval. We can't pass laws in our legislature without parlor tricks. We have armed white right wing mobs demonstrating for...whatever. We have black folks rioting because they are being mistreated by the police. Or economy is in shambles. The rich are rich as Croesus and at the same time our middle class is collapsing. We have the Republicans wanting to cut the stimulus package that people need so badly because it is too expensive while protecting tax cuts for the extremely wealthy. We have the democrats trying to put every progressive thingazoid into the bill including funding for three new museums: The Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum, the National Museum of the American Latino, and the Coast Guard Museum and a warning to China not to name their own Dali Lama.

Trust me resistor. The rest of the world is torn between crying and trying not to laugh in our faces. But they know something we have never experienced it appears. Wounded tigers are very dangerous.
User avatar
By Julian658
#15156541
Drlee wrote:We have the democrats trying to put every progressive thingazoid into the bill including funding for three new museums: The Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum, the National Museum of the American Latino, and the Coast Guard Museum and a warning to China not to name their own Dali Lama.

Trust me resistor. The rest of the world is torn between crying and trying not to laugh in our faces. But they know something we have never experienced it appears. Wounded tigers are very dangerous.


The National Museum of the American Latino :knife: :knife: :?: :?: OMG, I hope this is not done. Pretty soon every group will clamor a museum in the name of equity (code word for socialism). Hopefully immigrant Latin Americans will not put up with this. However, those born and raised in the USA may be poisoned by group ID politics.
#15156584
Pants-of-dog wrote:So the right to liberty only constrains government? And you have no problem if private individuals or companies s deprive other humans of life, liberty, and tPoH. Is that what you are arguing?

I think that at the time, the British government owned slaves, and I think the newly formed US government also had slaves. They also made many laws supporting the slave trade. So it would be incorrect to claim that the signatories were breaking with the status quo of government slavery.

And yes, the man did have sex with a black girl. She was between 14 and 16 the first time he hot her pregnant. He was approximately 45 years old at the time. This would be considered statutory rape now, and if my guess is correct, this sex was not consensual on her part.

Is rape also all right when private individuals do it, as opposed to government?



Yes, rigts are a social construct. Where else would they come from?


1) Actually for you to be on the side that brags about being right about everything, you seem to be consistently WRONG. If you're asking a personal opinion I think that corporations should be held to the same standard and guarantee the same Rights as the government. There IS a caveat:

Property owners and citizens both have equal Rights. AND, they cannot both exercise them at the same time, so we have a government that regulates situations so that both sides are equally protected. Since you cannot infringe on the property owner's Rights, in theory their Rights would take precedence over the Rights of others. That is a personal opinion, not one that any philosophy I know of puts it in those terms

2) You're right about one thing: it is your guess that the sex may not have been consensual - not unusual in terms of age difference for the time period. The evidence says it was a contractual agreement in exchange for Sally's unborn to be freed

3) Rape is illegal

4) Our Rights are built around presuppositional principles; if you want to call them social constructs then so would any metric of right or wrong be when applied to slavery.



4)
#15156585
ingliz wrote:Wrong!

The first documented reaping machine was the Gallic reaper that was used in modern-day France during Roman times.


Wrong!

The Chinese mechanised winnowing with the development of the rotary winnowing fan. This can be seen in Wang Zhen's book the Nong Shu (1313 AD).


Wrong!

Farmers in the region of Waasland (in present-day northern Belgium) pioneered a four-field rotation in the early 16th century.


Can't be arsed with the rest but I will leave you with this.


Wrong!

In 1804, Haiti (then Saint-Domingue) became the first sovereign nation in the Western Hemisphere to unconditionally abolish slavery in the modern era.

The U.S. abolished slavery in 1865 with the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.


:lol:


The state of Vermont outlawed slavery in 1777. By the time of the ratification of the Constitution (1789) over half the states outlawed slavery and slavery was never legalized by the Constitution. It was not within federal jurisdiction, but they did outlaw the importation of slaves in the Constitution. So, you've been proven wrong again and I'll be damned if I waste more space to school you on your lack of knowledge about history. It isn't even the subject, but if you ever get time READ THE FIRST THREE POSTS OF THIS THREAD.
#15156586
Rancid wrote:Rights don't exist in some universal form, rights are constructs we've created.

The universe itself doesn't give a shit if I murder someone.


Neither would they care if some guy named Bubba made you his house bitch. Why condemn slavery if you don't acknowledge a Right to Life?
#15156588
annatar1914 wrote:@The Resister ;




When legitimate government is doing only what is right and just for the people, you do have an animus if you resist that action. And being ''aware of Romans 13'', you should know that.



Again, I read your posts. One does not have an unalienable right to bear arms that is separate from being part of the organized and well-regulated militia that defends the country from enemies foreign and domestic. Read the whole 2nd Amendment;



Well regulated. For the Security of a free State.



Sure it matters, because what it decided was carried over into our own legal rulings after the revolution. Ever heard of ''Eminent Domain''? There is not an absolute title or right to private property in the United States, and never has been.

Government is what enables and defends or restricts or prohibits the private ownership of property to begin with, God did not grant the ''unalienable right'' to private property to us, it is a thing of men. Recall in Scripture;


''Someone in the crowd said to Him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me.” But Jesus replied, “Man, who appointed Me judge or executor between you?”


Gospel of St. Luke, Chapter 12:13.


1) What government is doing today is not in the people's best interest. The founders and framers wrestled with this principle and how to justify separation from King George. That counter-argument began in Galatians 5 : 1

2) If you had READ my posts, the courts disagreed with you. Court citations were given and the United States Supreme Court upheld it when they said that the Right is not dependent upon the Constitution for its existence. So what would you call a Right that you have which predates the Constitution?

3) Regulating the militia is different than infringing on the Right of the People



4) Not only have I heard of Eminent Domain, but have worked cases that were won in court. It was one of the KEY issues that I will address IF the trolls ever let this thread end

5) I will not argue property Rights with you. We are addressing unalienable Rights.

All we're accomplishing on this thread is to put my personal ideology on trial without any regard for the actual law - which has not been commented on or refuted in way, shape, fashion or form. So, like the guy trolling me that thinks he IS this board, I may have to start ignoring your posts. If the first two sentences don't relate to the difference between an inalienable Right and an unalienable Right, I won't read it.
#15156590
1) What government is doing today is not in the people's best interest.


So you say. But there is a metric which I apply in these cases, which is the Divine law as laid out in Scripture, Councils and Synods, the teachings of the Fathers, all of Holy Tradition, which trumps but is not in contradiction to genuine natural law.

The founders and framers wrestled with this principle and how to justify separation from King George. That counter-argument began in Galatians 5 : 1


The Apostle is speaking about freedom from the Jewish Law in that instance;

''Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.''


Because he says in the very next verse;


Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.




2) If you had READ my posts, the courts disagreed with you. Court citations were given and the United States Supreme Court upheld it when they said that the Right is not dependent upon the Constitution for its existence. So what would you call a Right that you have which predates the Constitution?


What you are doing here is clever... I don't deny the right to bear arms, and nor does God for that matter, as an unalienable right. What I do deny is the structure of how this right has been twisted out of it's meaning, divorced from civic military duty, being part of the Army of the People. Think Switzerland...Not the Old West.

3) Regulating the militia is different than infringing on the Right of the People


This is true! BUT, ''infringement'' of the ''Right of the People'' is such a matter that invites anarchy and strife. It's simple. There are no Rights without corresponding duties and responsibilities. Surely you know this when we deny Felons the right to bear arms, that there are distinctions? Problem is, your distinctions and my distinctions have different practical effects I'm sure.



Yeah, Penn and Teller are not as convincing in their political and moral prestidigitations as with their magical slight-of-hand, for the same reasons I gave earlier.

4) Not only have I heard of Eminent Domain, but have worked cases that were won in court. It was one of the KEY issues that I will address IF the trolls ever let this thread end


I'm not quite sure why you lack the opportunity now to address the point I made, but i'm eager to hear your take on eminent domain and the ''police power'' of government when it comes to real estate law.

5) I will not argue property Rights with you. We are addressing unalienable Rights.


Seems to me that echoing John Locke, the founding fathers were pretty much in unanimity that property rights as they existed were part of that ''bundle of rights'' which is part of common and american case law, but by no means ''unalienable''. US Supreme Court ''Kelo versus New Haven Conn.'' comes to mind.

All we're accomplishing on this thread is to put my personal ideology on trial without any regard for the actual law - which has not been commented on or refuted in way, shape, fashion or form. So, like the guy trolling me that thinks he IS this board, I may have to start ignoring your posts. If the first two sentences don't relate to the difference between an inalienable Right and an unalienable Right, I won't read it.


Are you by any chance one of these ''Sovereign Citizen'' guys? I'm not mocking you in asking that, I just am trying to get a clearer picture from you of where you stand on the issues you raise. Mind you, I'm aware of legal distinctions between ''of'' and ''the'', for example, if you get my point.
User avatar
By ingliz
#15156602
annatar1914 wrote:"Sovereign Citizen"

The cap appears to fit.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Sovereigns are clogging up the courts with indecipherable filings, and when cornered, many of them lash out in rage, frustration. ✅

The movement is rooted in racism and anti-Semitism. ✅

Many are unaware of their beliefs' origins.


Just another ignorant racist anti-semite, slightly mad to boot.

"slightly mad to boot":

Once separated from the corporate shell, the newly freed man is now outside of the jurisdiction of all admiralty laws. More importantly, by filing a series of complex, legal-sounding documents, the sovereign can tap into that secret Treasury account for his own purposes. Over the past 30 years, hundreds of sovereigns have attempted to perfect the process by packaging and promoting different combinations of forms and paperwork. While no one has ever succeeded, for the obvious reason that these theories are not true, sovereigns are nonetheless convinced, with the religious certainty of true cult believers, that they're close.

— SPLC, Sovereign Citizens Movement


:lol:
#15156608
Sovereign Citizens

The insanity of American society is truly awe-inspiring. It's as though the whole society suffered a psychotic break some time in the 1970s, and never quite recovered. :eek:
User avatar
By Odiseizam
#15156624
@Potemkin think the brake was since the whiskey rebellion onward ~ "We should be men first, and subjects afterward" ~ Henry David Thoreau [1][1][1]

@all'd'rest The Resister has point, as I can see there is definitely misuse , altho I am not anyhow expert on the us constitution, in matter of fact of any, but by deductive logic could say the human rights in usA are not guaranteed but possible if and when someone has will and power to fought for them, usually that are banc'corp entities coz they also literary are equal with the citizens [1] so now democracy serves not the masses but their bosses, what recently I've also cheered on behalf of usA as plutocracy!

so whiskey rebels in their fight against the systems oppression were not equal with the american revolutionaries that stood against brits, the liberators became tyrants ... when the federal state got stuck by the banc'corp elite [1][1] regularly the common people got the bill but they couldnt object ... in similar manner I can speculate about ERA equality ... here the fallacy of freedom is obvious, not that citizens are just oppressed by the system but also striped for any direct power, only indirect electoral one, not even basic consent comes from the people - if less for laws even lesser for any constitutional amendments - so change will never come, not even by referendum, eventually through legislators and governors if someday they become free from the banc'corp fists ...

    While the rights listed in the Declaration of Independence—life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness—were inalienable, the Founders understood that individuals are often stopped from exercising them. Indeed, this was the very purpose of the Declaration of Independence: to explain that King George III’s violations of the colonists’ inalienable rights justified the American Revolution. The Founders knew full well that while we are born with rights, we need some protection in order to have the freedom to exercise those rights.This principle helps explain the difference between “natural rights” and “legal rights.”
    ...
    https://www.docsoffreedom.org/student/readings/equal-and-inalienable-rights

... so question! Are the inalienable (legal) rights above the unalienable (natural) rights in usA? think so! altho this all have ultimately governing pretext [1] even the 14th amendment was misused as it please the system [2] altho the declaration states that the government power comes from the consent of the people that it governs, yet as ingliz pointed the same is not above the us constitution but mere decoration to it [3]
User avatar
By Potemkin
#15156625
The Declaration of Independence, unlike the Constitution, has no legal force. In fact, it was Lincoln who tended to interpret the Constitution through the lens of the Declaration, thereby raising the prestige of the Declaration to what it is now. But it still has no legal force, it has never had any legal force, and it never will have any legal force.
User avatar
By Rancid
#15156639
The Resister wrote:Neither would they care if some guy named Bubba made you his house bitch. Why condemn slavery if you don't acknowledge a Right to Life?


I do acknowledge a right to life. My point is, that right is a construct, not something that is trully universal.

Now get suck on BUbba's dick.
By wat0n
#15156641
Potemkin wrote:The insanity of American society is truly awe-inspiring. It's as though the whole society suffered a psychotic break some time in the 1970s, and never quite recovered. :eek:


It seems that particular form is not exclusive to the US:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land

Also, there's that old essay by Hofstadter arguing it has always existed in the US in one form or another.
User avatar
By Drlee
#15156648
The insanity of American society is truly awe-inspiring. It's as though the whole society suffered a psychotic break some time in the 1970s, and never quite recovered.


Indeed.

Sovereign Citizen........

No doubt. So much nonsense. Did anyone else notice this little tidbit?

Property owners and citizens both have equal Rights. AND, they cannot both exercise them at the same time, so we have a government that regulates situations so that both sides are equally protected.


:eh:

I can see 32 armed men, collectively possessing 32 teeth, sitting under the trees, hearing this and nodding wisely.

Not a clue.

We appear to have interrupted you-know-who's speech and he is angry/frustrated.

Personal note. Point of Judaeo-Christian prerogative with a nod to Annatar.

I cannot imagine an argument where I would concede that personally amassing weaponry with which to kill one's fellow man, outside of the framework of the state, is God's will. The very idea is anathema to everything Jesus taught. Not once in the 2000 years since Jesus taught us love for our fellow man did God ride in on a white horse wielding a flaming sword and smite our enemies.

And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake: and after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.—


I am naturally frightened of people claiming to know God's will claiming power from it. The US has a great many good Christian men. I can take you to meet any number of them. None of them are wearing store-bought camouflage, running around in a $40,000 jeep armed to the teeth. I can't image Jesus saying:

"Get thyself off to Big Five Sports and there possess camouflage clothing. Rend thy street clothing with its Godless embellishments from thy body and clothe thyself in the invidable garments of righteousness. Take up thy AK-47 and though it be the handiwork of Godless communists grasp it for thy mighty works. Mount up thy SUV, engage the cruise control, partake of thy air conditioning in thankfulness and speed to thy Bretherin who are assembled in distant valley to meet on the Sabbath. Keep the Sabbath Holy by joining thy brothers in righteous discourse. Honor the Sabbath by drinking of the fruit of the Holy Barley and of the Hops and of the sacred yeast but casteth not down the can but taketh it home to recycle. Urge thy considerable bulk across the face of the protesting land with as much stealth as thy can muster. After partaking of the Holy Beer take up thy AK-47 and shooteth upon images of liberals for they are evil. They desireth to take food and giveth it to the hungry without recompense. They desireth to give medicine to their ill brothers without insurance provided by their lawful employer. They consorteth with people of the dark countenance who come from the evil cities of Detroit and Atlanta and other places forsaken by the Lord your God. They consorteth with the people of the rainbow banner in all their evilness. Do all this that when the great Trump of God sounds in the land of Florida, you can rise up to wipe the Godless liberals out, in His mercy. Thus sayth the lord."
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

CNN explained well “5 surprising lessons from T[…]

I see we are using the 'if you can't blind them wi[…]

Well done grasshopper! http://s4.thing[…]

Prince Philip has died, age 99

I’m the only girl. It seems to be more or less exa[…]