What are the top 3 civil rights issues of our day?

[GunnyFreedom]

What are the top 3 civil rights issues of our day? 1st that draws you, 2nd that will draw the right, 3rd that will draw the left.

When the cup is full I want to do one of those 20-pick polls where you get to vote for your top 7. The top three will then be openly debated and hyperlinked from my civil rights platform at nc49.org as constituent education informing the voters of where I stand on Civil and Human Rights issues.

Top 3 Civil Rights issues of our generation:

my issue / rightdrawing issue / leftdrawing issue

[Golding]

Sort of a difficult question, since the whole "Right vs. Left" thing is a farce. But if you have to target the mindset of the follower rather than the population, I'd go with...

My issue:
The dependence on race and alleged "racism" as a leverage factor. From where I'm sitting, it's the primary reason that race remains on everyone's minds. Racism has gone from legitimate segregation and keeping certain populations denigrated, to nitpicking the vocabulary used to try to get people fired, unpopular, criminalized, etc. I first noticed it when there was a disproportionate uproar when we had a shock jock called women "Nappy headed hoes". I feel like this is what happens when you have people who have made their career out of hunting racism. Now that it's not really as significant an issue as it used to be, only they remain a problem.

An issue that your average Republican voter would probably be interested in:
If you're as daring as a Paul, you could take issue with the Civil Rights Act itself, how the attempt to enforce equality in actuality generates inequality. Same argument can be made about welfare, affirmative action, etc. You'd have to tread lightly to make these arguments, though, since closed-mindedness and an eagerness to proclaim racism (see: My issue) is widespread.

An issue that your average Democrat voter would probably be interested in:
Again, if you're as daring as a Paul, you could explain why the drug war disproportionately targets minorities for prison, and demonstrate how that is a civil rights issue.
Or more directly, you could mention gay marriage. Some here may disagree when it comes to gay marriage, though. It's an amazing (at least to me) how dividing the issue is. But it's made me take notice to how involved the government is in things as simple as marriage, and how uninvolved they should be. The only rational conclusion, in my opinion, is to remove government influence in marriage and leave it up to churches to decide. As it goes, you can most assuredly guarantee that the majority of people will be as satisfied as possible. Gay people will have churches that will accept them, and people who don't approve of gay marriage will belong to churches that don't allow gay marriage.

[mrsat_98]

Honest Money. Everything else is a distraction from the root problem.

[teacherone]

conservative issues:


abortion--bring it back to the states

education-- bring it back to the states


liberal issues--


wealth inequality-- end corporatism, let the fat cats fail, let the free market work, end the inflation tax through sound money, end the wars, eliminate taxation

race inequality-- ending the drug war will eliminate the gang warfare, ending corporatism will free up the economy, ending welfare will eliminate welfare dependency.

[Travlyr]

Honest Money. Everything else is a distraction from the root problem.
+1 +rep Honest Sound Money.

[awake]

State funded murder, theft and enslavement of course...

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

Honest Money. Everything else is a distraction from the root problem.

That's probably it. Though I have to say that its also the fact that the government doesn't understand/respect Negative Rights as laid out in the 9th and 10th Amendments.

[Dreamofunity]

State funded murder, theft and enslavement of course...

True.

[pcosmar]

Hard to say, or even define as 3 simple choices. They are so interconnected and overlapping.

My issue
The issue that brought me, that got me started was the 2nd amendment.
At present time, it is so trashed and neutered as to be unrecognizable and completely ineffective.

On the "Right" side.
Family issues. CPS, Schools. Parental rights.

On the "Left" The Police State, from warrant-less searches to Police brutality.

Though things like the War on Drugs. on terror, on poverty, on and on and on, tie all of these together.
It is a tangled ball of string and trying to separate and set it straight might be impossible.

[Freedom 4 all]

Sound Money
Gun Rights
Right to not be searched without grounds

[awake]

Absolute economic freedom is the primary issue upon which all others metastasize.

[Anti Federalist]

As others have already stated, but I agree:

At a state level that can be addressed.

Personal issue: 2nd Amendment

"Right Issue" - Taxes and spending

"Left Issue" - Race inequality in sentencing and corporate corruption.

[pcosmar]

This is like trying to identify and remove 2 hairs out of a hair ball the cat coughed up.

Good luck with that.
;)

[Anti Federalist]

This is like trying to identify and remove 2 hairs out of a hair ball the cat coughed up.

Good luck with that.
;)

Oh shit, that brought tears to my eyes.

ROFL!!!

+rep

[NYgs23]

I think protecting freedom on the Internet is hugely important because without it we might not be able to talk about honest money or anything else.

[kahless]

The unspoken taboo civil rights issue is enslavement of families to government policy. As has happened in Communist countries, the United States government has become the defacto parent of all children in this country.

In much of the US it is impossible to enter an equal marriage or relationship if at some point there are children involved. Once children enter a relationship, the government creates incentives to become the co-parent and typically creates a master - slave relationship of one of the parents (typically men).

The decline of marriage and increase in single parent households can be directly attributed to government providing - promoting a financial incentive to one parent to leave the other, while placing the other at a disadvantage in the relationship.

The government provides incentives to enslave one parent typically through lifestyle child support and ability to earn policies. Thus not only is one parent removed from his or her children, they are enslaved to the other and dicated by government, a career and income that they must maintain for 18-21. Despite whatever impossibility it is to maintain a specific career or income, the United States government requires it regardless of situation (coma, death, POW. (see Bradley Amendment, named after the worlds leading scumbag Bill Bradley). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment

Adult children may be living on their own, with the non-custodial (slave parent) paying for college, buying them cars and paying for their apartments directly. The adult children could be on drugs, having their own children and doing whatever they wish. They are adults, but the United States government does not see it that way. Further the parent hands are tied in preventing the flow of money in reward and deny bad behavior to ensure their childrens safety since the government requires the slave make payment regardless of the situation.

Due to radical feminism dominating government policy the non-custodial is required to pay child support (hidden alimony) to the ex-spouse. This is modern day slavery to millions of men and women across the US. The government has made themselves the parent and creating a master - slave relationship of one parent.

No one will ever talk about this fact since most people are trained like dogs by our Progressve radical feminist culture not to talk about it.

[Captain America]

Economic Liberty is the number one issue.

Sound Money and Personal Property rights with maximized private property rights.

[GunnyFreedom]

Good answers and discussion going on so far. Maybe a clarification of what I am looking for will explain.

I will be pursuing more than three issues, of course, but on the website I want to list the top 3 most impactful civil liberties issues and then explain how constitutionalism solves or relieves them, afterward taking a NAP approach to refine whatever Constitutional power found imperfect.

I want our big civil liberty issues, of course, but also those of red sheeple and blue sheeple. The idea being everyone comes to the place on the web where I am listing civil liberties, and each sees something that interests them, personally, and the solutions lead to our platform, and the results of recent votes touching on civil liberties.

They can't really be divided into categories well, so I'm trying to cherry-pick leaders on the front page. The end result will be a larger matrix of civil liberties issues all in a single list, ordered by importance, and what 'side' of the body politic does it appeal to. That will also be useful for RP12 no?

[98Tokay]

The State. Smash it.

[GunnyFreedom]

The State. Smash it.

beautiful. you can signwave for RP12. :) I'll hand the walking lists off to someone else though. :D

[mczerone]

Personal issue: abolish all professional licensing

Right issue: federal funding of non-christian teaching, or "immoral" science research.

Left issue: War, Bank/big business bailouts, War on Drugs

[Travlyr]

Industrial Hemp Farming

[GunnyFreedom]

Personal issue: abolish all professional licensing

Right issue: federal funding of non-christian teaching, or "immoral" science research.

Left issue: War, Bank/big business bailouts, War on Drugs

right, because licensing assumes ownership of your work. They own all your work, they own you. A deep civil right. On the right, how about the right for homeschools to be left alone? More school choice? or on the left social corporatism and bankster bailouts.

[GunnyFreedom]

Industrial Hemp Farming

One of the wealthiest agricultural products of our time. Impossible to get high on, was required growing during WW2, and makes better renewable paper than wood. It also grows in the same conditions as tobacco. If we cared about our environment and our farmers, we would let them grow industrial hemp and entrepreneurs will appear to turn it into paper. Burlington much? NC could corner the paper market nationwide within 4 years. Will that help our economy? :)

[cindy25]

conscription/mandatory national service

I am actually surprised no neo-con has proposed it in the wake of the Korean crisis

[GunnyFreedom]

+1 +rep Honest Sound Money.

We have a right to own real value, we just aren't allowed to express it. "do you actually own what you own" or do the banks own it all, even once it's bought and paid for. Banks describing fiat currencies mean they literally own all liquid value, and we have to interest them to participate in buying and selling. That's a tax.

[GunnyFreedom]

conscription/mandatory national service

I am actually surprised no neo-con has proposed it in the wake of the Korean crisis

Conscription is vehement to liberty, and everybody (supp and opp alike) is afraid to be the first to bring it up. I wonder.

"You will not conscript our sons for an undeclared war Act." setting the balance at least to a Constitutional Congressional Declaration of War. Could be interesting if that political war starts in DC....

I can't imagine you will ever get Congress to approve a draft though. So it's probably moot in this cycle. At least, the people aren't expecting it to happen as of now. I sidestepped Selective Service by volunteering first before it came. I would have anyway. To be honest I would have finished college and became an officer if not for Selective Service. I couldn't stomach the thought of my blood being owned by the government, so I volunteered earlier than I wanted to. My goal was to attend a Naval academy at the highest order and I was right on track. Selective Service made me join early because I just wouldn't let them own me. Ever.

I wonder how many others have a similar experience?

[GunnyFreedom]

The unspoken taboo civil rights issue is enslavement of families to government policy. As has happened in Communist countries, the United States government has become the defacto parent of all children in this country.

Parental Rights.


In much of the US it is impossible to enter an equal marriage or relationship if at some point there are children involved. Once children enter a relationship, the government creates incentives to become the co-parent and typically creates a master - slave relationship of one of the parents (typically men).

Paternal Rights.


The decline of marriage and increase in single parent households can be directly attributed to government providing - promoting a financial incentive to one parent to leave the other, while placing the other at a disadvantage in the relationship.

A perfect example of government trying to express moral code.


The government provides incentives to enslave one parent typically through lifestyle child support and ability to earn policies. Thus not only is one parent removed from his or her children, they are enslaved to the other and dicated by government, a career and income that they must maintain for 18-21. Despite whatever impossibility it is to maintain a specific career or income, the United States government requires it regardless of situation (coma, death, POW. (see Bradley Amendment, named after the worlds leading scumbag Bill Bradley). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment)

Adult children may be living on their own, with the non-custodial (slave parent) paying for college, buying them cars and paying for their apartments directly. The adult children could be on drugs, having their own children and doing whatever they wish. They are adults, but the United States government does not see it that way. Further the parent hands are tied in preventing the flow of money in reward and deny bad behavior to ensure their childrens safety since the government requires the slave make payment regardless of the situation.

Due to radical feminism dominating government policy the non-custodial is required to pay child support (hidden alimony) to the ex-spouse. This is modern day slavery to millions of men and women across the US. The government has made themselves the parent and creating a master - slave relationship of one parent.

No one will ever talk about this fact since most people are trained like dogs by our Progressve radical feminist culture not to talk about it.

Men are parents too! I bet if we got Uncle Sam out of our pants altogether, a lot of this would go away.

[GunnyFreedom]

As others have already stated, but I agree:

At a state level that can be addressed.

Personal issue: 2nd Amendment

"Right Issue" - Taxes and spending

"Left Issue" - Race inequality in sentencing and corporate corruption.

Spot on. I was always a 2ndA voter, for the down ballot tickets I voted straight NRA. I was thinking "save this one thing."

on the R & L it sounds like you have an ear on the ground there.

[GunnyFreedom]

Absolute economic freedom is the primary issue upon which all others metastasize.

True market freedom would prevent as much monopoly as we now have. No state enforcement of arbitrary rules (but focusing only on market fraud and collateral damage) lets companies innovate with fewer obstacles. Innovation creates market value and expanding markets create jobs. Government needs to re-legalize competition and sit on the sidelines and watch the market create new, lasting, and good paying jobs.

[james1906]

Glen,

How about you start your new career off with a bang and have a bill stating no airports in NC can use TSA for security purposes? If there's that opt out, then surely a state can invoke this.

That and Winston-Saurus.

[GunnyFreedom]

I think protecting freedom on the Internet is hugely important because without it we might not be able to talk about honest money or anything else.

Selective electronic access to all public State and Federal Internet equipment holdings is hereby banned, except by judicial warrant naming the peculiar person, time and place and particulars of the wrongful act, and on one sworn affidavit of testimony.

If taxpayers pay for it, they should have access to it. That includes transparency in government. Because of peering, demanding all subscribers be given access to the public equipment breaks the bubbles and makes it almost impossible to privately tier. All you need is bandwidth to a nearest backbone right? Establish the principle that taxpayers own the government in reality, and preserve the un-jinkered internet as a side effect of free market responses to such policy.

If you provide internet, your subscriber is required to have full access to the public internetz property that your company uses. As long as we have public property involved, I think that's fair, no? An ISP could avoid it simply by not using public equipment at all. It's almost voluntarist. if you participate in the gov sys you agree to carry our public traffic. If not, just don't worry about it. Private ISP's will then stand up too, for more sensitive traffic, and I think that is good. They can tier all they want to, their customers are willingly and knowingly asking for it.

You will end up with two internets, a public system and a private system. The public system able to ban nothing, but slower growing in bandwidth and more heavily trafficked. Then a private system that costs more, but grows rapidly in bandwidth and is way more reliable.

THAT WON'T DETRACT FROM OUR CURRENT "PUBLIC" SYSTEM. It will make it grow faster, actually, due to a faster innovation cycle from the private internet.

So what do you think, all government agencies holding public use Internet infrastructure equipment can say "use our equipment, and you will carry our traffic" and then define that traffic as "all taxpayers" ? I think it makes both sides of Net Neutrality collapse into a kind of agreement, if that's possible. But it's rough unformed and just in a draft of thoughts because I just now thought of it.

[GunnyFreedom]

conservative issues:


abortion--bring it back to the states
education-- bring it back to the states


liberal issues--


wealth inequality-- end corporatism, let the fat cats fail, let the free market work, end the inflation tax through sound money, end the wars, eliminate taxation
race inequality-- ending the drug war will eliminate the gang warfare, ending corporatism will free up the economy, ending welfare will eliminate welfare dependency.



This is a good listing, I like it. Right on the hot spots. Eliminating welfare is about people becoming more prosperous and self reliant, not less. It has become a system that rewards dishonesty and single parenthood and broken families. Enforced poverty and Hobson's welfare is destroying a whole culture like a weapon designed for it. The current system is clearly broken and needs to be re-conceived from the ground up. Maybe if the government held their taxation in trust to the payee, then people may be able to provide for their own welfare should the need ever arise? People start getting 'personal welfare accounts' when they first go on the job. people learn to manage their own emergency accounts, and slowly back the government out of welfare without collapsing the dependent.

ending corporatism likely doesn't need detailed explanation here, but corporatism is the primary complaint of the left against the right. Our platform is kinda beyond corporatism so there is a HUGE draw there. They just have to know we are serious about it and not just spilling rhetoric.

[lx43]

Ending Property taxes.

[kahless]

Good answers and discussion going on so far. Maybe a clarification of what I am looking for will explain.

I will be pursuing more than three issues, of course, but on the website I want to list the top 3 most impactful civil liberties issues and then explain how constitutionalism solves or relieves them, afterward taking a NAP approach to refine whatever Constitutional power found imperfect.

I want our big civil liberty issues, of course, but also those of red sheeple and blue sheeple. The idea being everyone comes to the place on the web where I am listing civil liberties, and each sees something that interests them, personally, and the solutions lead to our platform, and the results of recent votes touching on civil liberties.

They can't really be divided into categories well, so I'm trying to cherry-pick leaders on the front page. The end result will be a larger matrix of civil liberties issues all in a single list, ordered by importance, and what 'side' of the body politic does it appeal to. That will also be useful for RP12 no?

In 2008, about 35.7 million families (46%) had children under 18 at home. 86 percent of the population 45 years old has a child at some point in their lives.

This is a fairly large portion of the population of whom the government is offering a financial incentive to dissolve a marriage, create a single parent household and make one parent an indentured servant.

Having a child in the United States can result in the following automatically for one parent.

1.Punishment without wrongdoing (violation of the Eighth Amendment),
2.Loss of parental rights (First Amendment),
3.Loss of the right to a trial by jury.
4.Arbitrary restrictions on personal liberties,
5.Negatively impacting the pursuit of Happiness,
6.Made to pay child support without the right to question that the money is going for necessities (Due Process – Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment), and
7.Made to work to their full potential so as to maximize the child support paid (Thirteenth Amendment),

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion

Lifestyle child support laws combined with ability to earn meet all categories below and definition described.



Peonage
Refers to a person in "debt servitude," or involuntary servitude tied to the payment of a debt. Compulsion to servitude includes the use of force, the threat of force, or the threat of legal coercion to compel a person to work against his or her will.

Involuntary servitude
Refers to a person held by actual force, threats of force, or threats of legal coercion in a condition of slavery – compulsory service or labor against his or her will. This also includes the condition in which people are compelled to work against their will by a "climate of fear" evoked by the use of force, the threat of force, or the threat of legal coercion (i.e., suffer legal consequences unless compliant with demands made upon them) which is sufficient to compel service against a person's will. The first U.S. Supreme Court case to uphold the ban against involuntary servitude was Bailey v. Alabama (1911).

Requiring specific performance as a remedy for breach of personal services contracts has been understood to be a form of involuntary servitude.[16]

Forced labor
Labor or service obtained by:
threats of serious harm or physical restraint;
any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe they would suffer serious harm or physical restraint if they did not perform such labor or services:
the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal process.


I believe it is the Bill Bradley's 1986 Bradley Amendment that allows them to get around and essentially nullify the 13th amendment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment



Needless to say, there are endless stories of men who are now crushed by a debt they will never be able to pay because they were:

- In a coma
- A captive of Saddam Hussein during the first Gulf War In jail
- Medically incapacitated
- Lost their job but were confident of another so did nothing until it was too late
- Did not know they could not ask for retroactive adjustments and waited too long
- Cannot afford a lawyer to seek adjustment when adjustment was warranted
- Wouldn’t use the legal system even if they could, feeling it alien from their world, so don’t ask for a reduction when the legal establishment expects them to.

Some say this measure is a violation of due process and cruel and unusual as it removes the use of human discretion from dealing with individual cases, not to mention removing human compassion. But non-custodial fathers do not have the money to fight a constitutional case."

..........

notorious examples of unintended consequences including:

- A veteran of the first Gulf War who was captured in Kuwait in 1990 and spent nearly five months as an Iraqi hostage being arrested the night after his release for not paying child support while he was a hostage.

- A Texas man wrongly accused in 1980 of murder. After 10 years in prison, the man sued the state for wrongful imprisonment. The state responded with a bill for nearly $50,000 in child support that had not been paid while in prison.

- A Virginia man required to pay retroactive child support even though DNA tests proved that he could not have been the father.


How we got here?

- Soviet Communist system promoted by Irwin Garfinkel to be used as the Wisconsin model for Welfare Reform under Tommy Thompson. Eventually adopted by most states.

For further research Robert F. Gay and Stephen Baskerville publish a variety of articles related to this issue. I can condense some of this and highlight the best links when I have more time.
http://www.gndzerosrv.com/Web%20Pages/gay_pages.htm
http://stephenbaskerville.net/articles-bydate.htm

Research "Ron Paul" and "Child Support Reconciliation Act". Quote from Ron.


I would also remind my colleagues that the federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in the collection of child support, much less invade the privacy of every citizen in order to ferret out a few wrongdoers. Constitutionally, there are only three federal crimes: treason, counterfeiting, and piracy on the high seas. For Congress to authorize federal involvement in any other law enforcement issue is a violation on the limits on Congressional power contained in Article 1, section 8 and the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution. No less an authority than Chief Justice William Renhquist has stated that Congress is creating too many federal laws and infringing on the proper police powers of the states.

- Best interests of the children? No. Best interests of the politicians, NOW, lawyers, Judges, federal incentives given to states and counties and variety of special interests groups. Many of these laws were adopted based upon false statistics provided by special interests groups.

Child support management and collection for the states is quite lucrative for the military industrial complex. Thus the financial incentives are all there for various groups to manufacture an epidemic of non-payers to create a system which they all benefit (for which very few non-payers exist).

- Physical torture of those unable to pay or in arrears is far more prevelant than the media spotlight on the war on terror - rendition. There are thousands of examples of those unable to pay being abused at the hands of law enforcement for this debt. In this example provided below the man actually over paid and was still tortured by the police.

Man Tortured for child support arrears (even though he over paid) Pt 1/2
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/09/11/series-tortured-for-child-support-arrears-12/
Part 3/4
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2009/09/22/tortured-for-child-support-arrears-he-didnt-owe-pts-3-4/

[kahless]

American Child support laws come from Soviet family law - Terrorism against Americans

http://pr-usa.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=541038&Itemid=28


Communism is alive and well and it runs the United States. It is known child support and its enforcement. For our own legislators and judges to embrace such laws violates their own constitutional and fidelity oaths that they took as public officials. Passage and enforcement of such foreign laws constitutes treason and sedition.

In Irwin Garfinkle's paper, "Sweden's Child Support System" (1982) is the current model for the state of Wisconsin which has been emulated by a large number of states in the U.S. However, economics experts found that the child support system came from the former Soviet Union. The "Wisconsin Model" is based on Soviet Family Law, Article 81 of the The Russian Family Code, incorporated in 1964 and adopted in 1995. This model invokes the income shares approach--how much each parent makes determines how much child support is paid, rather than the true cost of raising children. As the Communist Manifesto says: "Each according to ability; each according to his needs". The "percentage of income" formula comes directly from the Russian lawbooks. The Russians used 25% for one child, 30% for two, and 35% for 3 or more. Sound familiar? This made sense in a country where most everyone was poor, prices were controlled, and the transfer of "wealth" was the most important fundamental ideal of the oppressive regime's entire economic system.

We have our own Constitution and a different relationship between government and private economy. It is anti-American to transplant social programs outside the political and economic context in which they develop because this inevitably leads to treason and sedition and the overthrow of our government by internal forces. The New Jersey "income shares model", rammed through without any public debate, was developed by Robert Williams of Policy Institute, Inc. Williams makes his fortune off this child support formula. It created his nationwide private child support collection agency empire.

Russian fathers (as do American fathers) pay the amount prescribed by the formula. There is no excuse for non-payment. There are no deviations, exceptions, or consideration of individual circumstances (involuntary unemployment, disability, illness, etc). Most payments in the Russian system (and American system) are taken directly by government. They are all processed by the central bureaucracy. The bureaucracy doesn't care about "special circumstances". There was no "individual" in Soviet society--only compliance. Those who found, or even look for, a way to avoid compliance in the Russian, as well as the American child support system, get jail (debtor's prison, prohibited by US and NJ Constitutions), credit problems (constitutes defamation as well as violating federal debt anti-discrimination laws), exclusion from work, loss of rights, and loss of government benefits. Sound strikingly familiar? Government created child support hysteria, (notice that the public isn't falling for this hysteria) causes many to be jailed, causing loss of employment due to no fault of their own, thus, leaving people unable to fend for themselves.

Russian Communists humiliated, condemned and ostracized fathers and called them "deadbeats" when they were unable to pay. They put up posters with names and pictures of people who interfered with communist "efficiency". The American child support enforcement tyranny uses identical tactics in this country.

Why then, are the biggest, most important U.S. social policy changes of the last 15-20 years based on the Soviet-Communist model? Why are the centralized computer systems purchased for the child support system powerful enough to keep track of intimate details of every person on the planet? Why have there been so many court decisions undermining the guarantees in the Bill of Rights? It involves a completely foreign vision of the basic fundamental relationship between individuals and the state; something that is indeed, anti-American? Those who say we won the Cold War are sadly mistaken.

Judges, child support workers, law enforcement, politicians, and others involved in this communistic redistribution of wealth scam are in direct violation of the United States Constitution. Why? Because these public officials took an Oath of Office to uphold, defend and support the U.S. Constitution and respective state constitution. By adopting and embracing Soviet child support laws in the United States is a direct attack upon the United States Constitution and constitutes felony Official Misconduct--an impeachable offense. It also constitutes a declaration of war against the United States. That would constitute treason.

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has stated that:

"No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.". Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).

Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason.

Having taken at least two, if not three, oaths of office to support the Constitution of the United States, and respective state constitution, any judge who has acted in violation of the Constitution is engaged in an act or acts of treason.


If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he is without jurisdiction, and he has engaged in an act or acts of treason. Whenever a judge acts where he does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821).


Pursuant to the legal encyclopedia used by the legal community for research, the Corpus Juris Secundum, Officers, Section 60, states: "A requirement that public employees take an oath that they will not only uphold and defend the state and federal constitutions, but also that they will oppose the overthrow of the government by force, violence, or any illegal or unconstitutional method, is valid". Citing the U.S. Supreme Court case of Cole v. Richardson, 405 U.S. 676, 92 S.Ct. 1332 (1972).

We are headed in the wrong direction for this country. Government is passing more and more draconian child support enforcement laws and related domestic violence laws every day. Government oppression is at its highest pinnacle since the British ruled this country over 225 years ago. For what? Because some bureaucracy wants to remain employed by violating and depriving the people of their fundamentally secured rights? It has become big government-big business. Just like in the Soviet Union.

Bruce Eden, Civil Rights Director

DADS (Dads Against Discrimination)--New Jersey
www.dadsamerica.org

[fisharmor]

Wow, not much hate for the War on Drugs in this thread...

It's legally unfounded.

It makes criminals out of people who own specific chemicals or plants, therefore conditioning society to the notion that it is just as bad to own a thing as it is to use the thing destructively. Direct tie-in with 2nd amendment abuses.

It is racist, overwhelmingly imprisoning minorities who see drugs as the only way to escape poverty. Direct tie-in to the abuses of compulsory schools, which by design produce the type of people who feel as if they either have to sell drugs or take drugs to escape their predicament.

It turned our justice system into a farce, as your sentence is directly tied to the amount of money you have to spend on defense.

Direct tie-in with the child protection laws... can't let people who possess some plants to keep their kids, after all.

It eroded private property rights to the point where any random citizen caught with a small amount of industrially important plant in their possession is cause for confiscating their cars, house, and bank accounts. That's if you even survive the initial encounter with law enforcement at this point: your animals certainly won't.

If I had to pick one I'd go with sound money, but people, get on the boat here - there isn't any other single issue that results in so many different civil rights violations.

[GunnyFreedom]

Wow, not much hate for the War on Drugs in this thread...

It's legally unfounded.

It makes criminals out of people who own specific chemicals or plants, therefore conditioning society to the notion that it is just as bad to own a thing as it is to use the thing destructively. Direct tie-in with 2nd amendment abuses.

It is racist, overwhelmingly imprisoning minorities who see drugs as the only way to escape poverty. Direct tie-in to the abuses of compulsory schools, which by design produce the type of people who feel as if they either have to sell drugs or take drugs to escape their predicament.

It turned our justice system into a farce, as your sentence is directly tied to the amount of money you have to spend on defense.

Direct tie-in with the child protection laws... can't let people who possess some plants to keep their kids, after all.

It eroded private property rights to the point where any random citizen caught with a small amount of industrially important plant in their possession is cause for confiscating their cars, house, and bank accounts. That's if you even survive the initial encounter with law enforcement at this point: your animals certainly won't.

If I had to pick one I'd go with sound money, but people, get on the boat here - there isn't any other single issue that results in so many different civil rights violations.

I think there is plenty of hatred for the WOD here, it's just that the electorate is not going to respond well to a Freshman State House Rep on the issue at this time. putting the WoD on the backburner is just my way of staying on the mound so I can keep throwing pitches. I've already planned on taking on the WoD front and center in my 3rd term if I last that long. There is just too much else to do to toss all my capital away up front. :( And fighting against the WoD is a HUGE political capital sink in today's America. :(

[kahless]

I think there is plenty of hatred for the WOD here, it's just that the electorate is not going to respond well to a Freshman State House Rep on the issue at this time. putting the WoD on the backburner is just my way of staying on the mound so I can keep throwing pitches. I've already planned on taking on the WoD front and center in my 3rd term if I last that long. There is just too much else to do to toss all my capital away up front. :( And fighting against the WoD is a HUGE political capital sink in today's America. :(

#1500 post! What issues do you plan on tackling in your 1st term? I am curious of what you thought are about my 3 posts on the federal government interfering in how parents raise their children.

[GunnyFreedom]

#1500 post! What issues do you plan on tackling in your 1st term? I am curious of what you thought are about my 3 posts on the federal government interfering in how parents raise their children.

Well, I think there is stuff worth fighting for, and there is stuff that gets promoted to the front page of a website. The paternal rights issue you are talking about is big and it's real. I agree that something needs to be done, and your writeup is quite helpful at doing that. I'm not sure how it will play on the front page though. I am worried about the sheeple rolling their eyes like on the assassination list "oh that's just a terrorist" but in this case "oh that's just a father." It's only because our society is in trouble that could be the case. If society weren't already so jacked up, then parental rights and American assassination could go on the front page as they are pretty huge issues.

I think Parental Rights is something I will definitely work on given the opportunity to actually do something, but instead of the front page of the website, it'll be 3-ish clicks in to the website. And that only because our society is already broken. and doesn't rightly know what issues it should care about. I mean really, OK with the TEA junk-grabbers? Society is frelled right now. Same reason I can't talk too openly about the WoD. Our society has been programmed to just assume it's always the Dad's fault.

Yeah, I can and must work on paternal rights, it just has to keep a lower profile than the things that Sheeple already somewhat agree on. Once we get past the "statism is god" thing that so many Americans seem to worship, I think the priorities of the American people will look a lot more like ours. I also think restoring parental and paternal rights is an important key step in healing our society, so it has to get worked on before it is politically correct to do so.

I can however, probably link to a more generic "parental rights" from the front page and put a link to paternal rights from the resulting page...