toward being a free man on the land

Let me see what was the question about your link. I have a pole there is water it has fish in it. I fish.
Did I exist? yes I do
who is my maker? there is a makers mark in my dna if you look. The lineage of the family.
I admit the origin of my maker. as I become aware I know I AM, the same was spoken by my creator I AM

Did I not exist before the birth certificate. Of course
Who wrote the birth certificate? The state who owns the birth certificate? the state. Who controls the birth certificate? The state. Am I my birth certificate no, I am not. I am a man.
It’s a lengthy read.

If yo want codes here cites

I have only been in court twice and both times swore on the bible. NC courts.

Such a lemming would then leave the herd just as you can leave our society if you do not want to follow.

I’m glad to see that you are finally making sense. May I ask where you are going to move to?

Of course they are, but no court exists unless taxpayers fund it and no court has effective power unless the taxpayers fund the police, etc. (Your SC/FOTL “common-law courts” are not courts.)

My cite is legally valid.
Your cite is legally crap.

ahem

Wait, what has that to do with the sanity/insanity of our leaders?

And, you do understand, don’t you, that the common law you revere is not natural law and has nothing to do with “natural rights”?

Doubly puzzling, because I can’t imagine someone with the OP’s intensity and beliefs voting for anyone.

You really should ponder what this “4. To define the meaning of all words appearing on government forms, regardless of how the government defines them” really means. A language works because a group of people agree to follow the rules of the language, which includes agreeing to common meanings of words. You’ve taught me that the people you follow believe that the true meanings of words are secrets known to very few people. But, the people you follow are telling you that they are inventing those secret meanings. This is a philosophy based on Alice in Wonderland.

Well, that’s NC. The practice in American courts is different. :wink:

Hell, my jury service was in Texas, and I never swore on a Bible. They just had us raise our hands.

If you didn’t put your hands up, did they shoot you?

Who ever said you were?

Language of the birds. Why do you ask?here

Because, going by your posts in this thread so far, your skill at expression in English is embarrassingly poor, and the results often barely coherent or completely incoherent/illucid.

But an imaginary language would explain a majority of his posts, wouldn’t it?

Wow. just has an epiphany.
The average poster here is not recognizing, my field of references, the Divine.
The citizens I see as free souls and divine creatures The average person doesn’t see that umbilical cord to the creator and The Law resonates at every part of being.

I don’t see the corporate identity created by birth certificates and being summoned to appear in court in person. To me that sounds like occult.

You say my rights are granted by a court of law…Created by government as our overlord to keep us from doing things that are lawful but not legal…

Driving a car is lawful.
Doing it with out a approved license, is not legal.
So is a license a priveledge to do something unlawful unless its legal.
I cannot see the madness that says sign me up.
Just saying

That’s right. Even actual lemmings don’t act the way you think.

How big a metaphor do you need to get hit with before you consider maybe your beliefs are wrong?

Read this.

Ummm . . . I addressed that part of your argument in one of my previous posts.
If I grant that rights are bestowed by the Creator, He did not grant you any rights above what he gave all of us. If you wish to stay to yourself and respect those God-given rights of everyone else then no one would have an issue.

The problem is when you presume that your God-given rights should suppress my God-given rights to liberty or defense of property. Now your position changes from WE have natural rights to YOU have natural rights and that is the issue. Let’s look at the fish you took. You contend that God gave YOU dominion over fish and beast but that is not true; he gave US (as humans) dominion over fish and beast and YOU as an individual have no more right to that fish as anyone else. In fact you have no rights to the fish if someone owns the pond and the fish therein.

So there your argument fails unless you recognize that your natural rights are not superior to the natural rights we all have.