Where not repugnant.
Common Law Public Declaration; Without Prejudice: Braveheart is one of the most widely accepted films in MAINSTREAM cinema history. Its anecdotes offer timeless and cherished, culturally and mutually understood philosophies which enter the core of nearly all American’s minds, mutual understandings, culturally accepted normative, etc.
.. We also happen to be of Irish, Czech & Scot.
The SYMBOLISM afforded by Braveheart and its ANCIENT pre-dated concepts offer images & core philosophies which transcend even the utterance of words.
e.g. Romeo and Juliet : Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive - conflate not, tragedy abhorrent souls! I love my God and His Laws. Each day we should all be grateful for, as a matter of fact.
The archetype known as William Wallace is accepted WORLDWIDE as a hero against TYRANNY, and his contrived means of overcoming this tyranny somehow make the word legend a small one.
Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985) - https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/472/38/
Even the TYRANTS understand this, for how could they not? Even TYRANTS understand the powerful Creator-given Law which predates all written lineage. For anyone of good conscience to fail to acknowledge this and these FACTS is akin to pure and simple FALSE WITNESS, covetousness, idolatry beside common Law, etc., and God’s Law, predating. A principle & Law so old, it appears in the second chapter of the first book of the Bible.
Being myself gilded by my own compass, I should not recognize e.g. India’s mandates holding bearing over me save for extreme measure - exodus or refuge, where each is their own sovereign & cultural bindings; and where each their own concept of honor in time and place is whole inherent to each own journey or timelines forbearance one to the other, Shalah. As mention, may God show even also the light on the hill & the one empirical Law, accessible now in every corner of the world, Shalah.
America, where self-determinism and man’s conscious imperative to ancient Law is supreme, pre-dating even written prescription of remedy if we were able to find the comparable ancient coin that hadn’t been eroded.
Conflate not, I do not purport to change the letter of God’s Law. The reader is encouraged to identify the lie.
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
.. she and our children being priceless, isn’t this fact? Yay. Yes. Forever and always the more to me, than breathing. Shalah.
Beautiful, I might mention; and profound in their own contributions to our world.
When they came for me; when they came for us, I have reason to believe they knew we were not listed on their public ledger as married. This is poignant. From the start, this was used against us as a strategy to dislodge us from the land. When you are Lawfully married, there’s very little they can do to you outside of the Law without severe righteous repercussions. When you are legally married, your rights are surreptitiously converted to privileges and a fee charged. Although unLawful, although repugnant to Law, this is the practice in the appeal to tradition fallacy.
Legal is like plaque on the tooth. You can have legal and engage in this appeal to tradition fallacy for decades; centuries even. Legal, although repugnant to the Lawful, is treated in its place as Law. And the appeal to ignorance fallacy is heavily leveraged upon the populace. My engagement of you is to force your hand of learnedness. You must quickly be brought up to the speed on what the Law is, as distinct from the plaque on the tooth called legal. I must lean heavily on YOU, the READER, being quickly brought up to speed on the Law, and knowing the difference.
When they came for us, I have reason to believe they knew in advance what strategy they would employ. I have reason to believe this strategy was pre-meditated. When they came for us, they needed to unLawfully detain me so that they could whittle away at her. I have reason to believe this was ALWAYS the strategy. However,
Mark 10:9
King James Version
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
Matthew 19:6
King James Version
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
My family YEARNS for the legal to catch up with the Lawful. Surely, the reader must understand, there is no place for plaque on the tooth. The Law which is the tooth must be cleaned off, the tooth underneath must be restored. My family YEARNS for the Law to be restored in place of the plaque on the tooth.
Our outward facing countenance in the courtroom is greatly fortified with the essential minerals of this quasi-jurisdiction being restored. The plaque in this context is necessary to be brought to bear by the tooth underneath. The Law must be restored so they do not attempt to put us asunder again.
And, while we can and will engage in the full of our rights with impunity pursuant but not limited to Marbury v. Madison, 5 US (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262, our countenance demands a restoration and full and upright acknowledgement of the LAW.
Recall the date January 7th, 2021 was ERASED from the public record when my Facebook Profile was deleted. This is no small disgrace, Facebook, Meta, or whatever else you would hind behind. Shame on you. Shame on ALL of you who VIOLATED my family. God bless you, if and only if ‘thine will be done.’
Now, being on exodus in Nebraska, we exist in a state of purgatory. We exist in a state of the quasi. As I have said, shame on ALL of you who VIOLATED my family. God bless you, if and only if ‘thine will be done.’
We would very much like to get on with our lives now, but there are things which keep us waiting, yearning, longing for the restoration of our countenance and the things which must transpire to make us whole.
I heard it said at church the other day, you can’t get baptized twice. The second would nullify or fail to acknowledge the first. I think that’s true, or at least worth pondering about. Yes, we would very much like be rendered as whole now…
https://zchg.org/t/social-media-censorship/271
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16Y5wQVT6m/
What is the right of privacy? What is the right of private contract? What is private property? What is the right of covenant with God? What is ‘fair and equal?’ What is ‘severability?’
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16DiTw7VTk/
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16UwRnJhdH/
Not to be construed as an admission: https://chatgpt.com/…/682ca5c0-9e20-8001-9212-ed6fb44cb8cd
“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. And the law is the definition and limitation of power. It is indeed, quite true, that there must always be lodged somewhere, and in some person or body, the authority of final decision; and in many cases of mere administration the responsibility is purely political, no appeal except to the ultimate tribunal of the public judgement, exercised either in the pressure of opinion or by means of the suffrage. But the fundamental rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, considered as individual possessions, are secured by those maxims of constitutional law which are the monuments showing the victorious progress of the race in securing to men the blessings of civilization under the reign of just and equal laws, so that, in the famous language of the Massachusetts Bill of Rights, the government of the commonwealth “may be a government of laws and not of men.” For, the very idea that man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life, at the mere will of another, seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself.” Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370
