If you’ve never read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley, you should, especially if your view of the world today is as tainted as my own about government intrusion, overreach and oppression. I’m not gonna lie and tell you it’s an easy read. At times, it is a ponderous work chock full of long descriptive passages that rival Tolkien’s environmental depictions in Middle Earth. The work, though, does come full circle literally to a single sentence near the end of the novel (and you can’t simply skip to the end to appreciate the enormity of the subject matter or its intent), but the fact is that after reading this novel, you’ll have a much clearer understanding of why government is the way it is, why it feels compelled to remain that way, despite heavy opposition from the voting public, and why the government, like a cornered animal, will lunge outward at its attackers and fight any way it deems necessary to ensure its survival.
There are easier reads. Animal Farm and 1984 by George Orwell or Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. Or if you’re the movie type of person, The Purge, Gattaca, The Giver or Logan’s Run. All of these are superb examples of government power gone seriously awry while the rights of the individual have been forever altered to non-sequiturs in the mainstream thought.
Recently, another Orwellian nasty has been propagating the insistence that government is far superior in judgment of who should be parents and who should not. More precisely, this law professor is insisting that government should actually, literally choose which parent receives which baby! Read more of this astounding level of arrogance on the next page!
Why?
Because our forebears, shellshocked from wars and economic/social upheavals fell, prey to politicians/lawyers.
When you see “United States” in a sentence or law you know that it is referring to the country, right? Well maybe not. The U.S. Supreme Court in Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945) stated;
The term ‘United States’ may be used in any one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends, or it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution.
So the term “United States” may be (among others):
1. A nation among other nations, as when the United States is represented at the U.N. A singular entity.
2. The territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends. Since this is also a singular entity it must mean the areas over which the Federal government has jurisdiction.
3. The Several States united by the Constitution. A plural term. The term Several States is usually used to denote the 50 separate States in law.
The first definition is easily understood; the second and third are not. Let’s look at the second definition in the U.S. Constitution.
The 14th Amendment
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside…..
The 14th Amendment states its area of law is “…THE United States, and subject to THE jurisdiction thereof…” The term here is singular, the jurisdiction, or else it would be their jurisdiction or the jurisdictions. Hence it refers to the territory of the Federal Government. It can be stated also as Congress or the District of Columbia.
Remember that the U.S. Constitution and the State Constitutions are contracts in nature and as such should follow the “Four Corners” doctrine. Essentially, if it is not addressed within the four corners of the document it is not addressed and must not be assumed.
“Privileges and immunities clause of Fourteenth Amendment protects only those rights peculiar to being citizen of federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship.”
Jones v. Temmer, Federal Supplement, Vol. 829, Page 1227 (1993)
The fourteenth amendment created citizen of the federal government. This status is a privilege granted by the government
“We have cited these cases for the purpose of showing that the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal Constitution against the powers of the Federal government. They were decided subsequently to the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment…”
Maxwell v. Dow, 176 US 598 (1900)
And from the Slaughter-House Cases in 1873
“The first clause of the fourteenth article was primarily intended to confer citizenship on the Negro race, and secondly to give definitions of citizenship of the United States, and citizenship of the States, and it recognizes the distinction between citizenship of a State and citizenship of the United States by those definitions.
The second clause protects from the hostile legislation of the States the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States as distinguished from the privileges and immunities of citizens of the States.
The privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States are those which arise out of the nature and essential character of the NATIONAL government, the provisions of its Constitution, or its laws and treaties made in pursuance thereof; and it is these which are placed under the protection of Congress by this clause of the fourteenth amendment.” (emphasis added)
So if you are a citizen under the alleged 14th amendment you are not one of “We The People” but under the jurisdiction of the “National government”. Please remember that we are supposed to have a federal government not a national one. The 14th amendment allows the federal government to have it own citizens, actually subjects/chattel, separated from the protections afforded state Citizens.
As subjects, Americans have no Rights just privileges granted by their owner, the government.
That is why you have to pay for permission to do practically anything.
The Right to Marry
A lot of you reading this have exercised your God-given right to get married. But, if you are exercising a right, why do you need permission from the government to do it? Years ago the government tried to validate it by stating you needed a blood test to prevent spreading disease but that’s not done now. So why do you need a license?
Definitions from Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Ed:
“license” “The permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission, would be illegal.”
“marriage license”
“A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry.”
“Intermarry” is “Miscegenation”
“Miscegenation”
“mixture of races; marriage between persons of different races, as between a white and a Negro.”
Some marriage licenses will actually state that its purpose is for interracial marriage.
“marriage certificate”
“An instrument which certifies a marriage, and is executed by the person officiating at the marriage; it is not intended to be signed by the parties, but is evidence of the marriage.
Most of you are not part of a “marriage between persons of different races” so that isn’t the reason for modern marriage licenses. What else?
Slaves could be married with permission from their owner(s). Of course all children and property acquired would belong to the owner. As shown before, the 14th amendment made you a citizen of the corporation known as the United States (Congress) and the 13th amendment allows the United States (Congress) to have slaves. Want more proof?
Marriage is a civil contract to which there are three parties; the husband, the wife and the state.
Van Koten v. Van Koten, 154 N.E. 146; 5-97-0108 in the appellate court of Illinois fifth district —West v. West No. 93-F-92
Justice Maag delivered the opinion of the court: This action was brought in April of 1993 by Carolyn and John West (grandparents) to obtain visitation rights with their grandson, Jacob Dean West. Jacob was born January 27, 1992. He is the biological son of Ginger West and Gregory West, Carolyn and John’s deceased son…
However, this constitutionally protected parental interest is not wholly without limit or beyond regulation. Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166, 88 L. Ed. 645, 64 S. Ct. 438, 442 (1944). “[T]he state has a wide range of power for limiting parental freedom and authority in things affecting the child’s welfare.” Prince, 321 U.S. at 167, 88 L. Ed. 645, 64 S. Ct. at 442.
In fact, the entire familial relationship involves the State. When two people decide to get married, they are required to first procure a license from the State. If they have children of this marriage, they are required by the State to submit their children to certain things, such as school attendance and vaccinations. Furthermore, if at some time in the future the couple decides the marriage is not working, they must petition the State for a divorce. Marriage is a three-party contract between the man, the woman, and the State. Linneman v. Linneman, 1 Ill. App. 2d 48, 50, 116 N.E.2d 182, 183 (1953), citing Van Koten v. Van Koten, 323 Ill. 323, 326, 154 N.E. 146 (1926). The State represents the public interest in the institution of marriage. Linneman, 1 Ill. App. 2d at 50, 116 N.E.2d at 183.
(emphasis mine)
This public interest is what allows the State to intervene in certain situations to protect the interests of members of the family. The State is like a silent partner in the family who is not active in the everyday running of the family but becomes active and exercises its power and authority only when necessary to protect some important interest of family life.
Well, every student she has is an adult who votes. Any students who did not walk out of her class are not the brightest nor the best. Harvard is no longer producing leaders.
Ego-maniac Neurotic control freaks.
TRAITOR AND TREASONOUS < SHE SHOULD BE HUNG DRAWN AND QUARTERED, WE NEED LESS FREEDOM HATING PEOPLE IN POSITIONS OF POWER PERIOD.
I disagree, but we already are.
Total bs garbage they can start with you ahole
They already are, every family on the internet or on a phone.
Just like in communist Cuba and the CDR, or Comite de Defensa de la Revolucion (Committees for the Defense of the Revolution), aka goverment snitches in every neighborhood and in every community, spying on the people, and reporting to the communist party every move everyone made on the island… these POS communists are all the same, no matter where they are.
This is all in my book Born Again, read it and learn what I experienced in communist Cuba.
https://www.amazon.com/Born-Again-Luis-T-Puig-ebook/dp/B07SGWHD9X/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1YGJEYI9BVGPP&keywords=born+again+luis+t+puig&qid=1564765827&s=gateway&sprefix=born+again+lu%2Caps%2C149&sr=8-1
Her contract should be terminated asap.
She may want to move to a Communist country
Please God this country needs YOUR HELP turn these horrible souls to You