Declaration of Independence is Law, it is U.S. Code[W:118]

[Master PO]

Do you even recognize when people are openly telling you that your OP and everything else that flowed from you in the thread is all nonsense?

people can proclaim anything it does not make it so......

you and 5 other people can tell 1 single person the federal government is empowered per the constitution to give money to people......however saying it ......does not make it so.

 

[Master PO]

What purpose is that? How does this 'purpose' effect or impact my life?

when a state entered the union the state constitution of that state.... cannot violate the principles of the DOI.

a couple of examples below

meaning the state constitution cannot declare that government grants people their rights.

that the state constitution cannot proclaim people of the state are to be treated differently by the government of the state.

 

[haymarket]

when a state entered the union the state constitution of that state.... cannot violate the principles of the DOI.

a couple of examples below

meaning the state constitution cannot declare that government grants people their rights.

that the state constitution cannot proclaim people of the state are to be treated differently by the government of the state.

Where in the Declaration is that language?

 

[Summerwind]

when a state entered the union the state constitution of that state.... cannot violate the principles of the DOI.

a couple of examples below

meaning the state constitution cannot declare that government grants people their rights.

that the state constitution cannot proclaim people of the state are to be treated differently by the government of the state.

You ain't real bright are you? There are states right now proclaiming people in various states can be treated differently by the government of the state. Some have welfare, some don't, some have SSM, some don't, some don't allow atheists to run for public office, most don't....
You are just very bizarrely misinformed.

 

[haymarket]

people can proclaim anything it does not make it so......

you and 5 other people can tell 1 single person the federal government is empowered per the constitution to give money to people......however saying it ......does not make it so.

If those five other people are justices on the Supreme COurt making that decision - it most certainly does make it so..... at least for those who live in the USA of reality and not a willful construct produced from their own extremist delusions.

 

[Master PO]

Where in the Declaration is that language?

i will post it,. BUT why do i have to keep posting it for you over and over.

from the DOI

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights

rights which are not created by government


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

equality under the law for all men.

 

[Master PO]

If those five other people are justices on the Supreme COurt making that decision - it most certainly does make it so..... at least for those who live in the USA of reality and not a willful construct produced from their own extremist delusions.

you did not read....my post well, which you have a great deal of problems with.

is empowered per the constitution

no where in constitutional law does it say government can give people money.

 

[haymarket]

i will post it,. BUT why do i have to keep posting it for you over and over.

from the DOI

that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights

rights which are not created by government


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

equality under the law for all men.

You failed to produce any language which does the things you claimed it does.

Neither of those statements of belief are written as legal language binding the state or citizens to do or be held accountable by anything. That language does NOTHING.

 

[haymarket]

you did not read....my post well, which you have a great deal of problems with.

is empowered per the constitution

no where in constitutional law does it say government can give people money.

Like I said - at least for those who live in the USA of reality and not a willful construct produced from their own extremist delusions.

 

[Master PO]

You failed to produce any language which does the things you claimed it does.

Neither of those statements of belief are written as legal language binding the state or citizens to do or be held accountable by anything. That language does NOTHING.

sorry wrong again..... i already posted it way back on this thread...but you don't listen!

enabling acts are used for many states.... stating the same thing on the DOI

Enabling Act



AN ACT to provide for the division of Dakota into two States and to enable the people of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington to form constitutions and State governments and to be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and to make donations of public lands to such States.

(Approved February 22, 1889.) [25 U.S. Statutes at Large, c 180 p 676.]

SEC. 4. That the delegates to the conventions elected as provided for in this act shall meet at the seat of government of each of said Territories, except the delegates elected in South Dakota, who shall meet at the city of Sioux Falls, on the fourth day of July, eighteen hundred and eighty-nine, and, after organization, shall declare, on behalf of the people of said proposed States, that they adopt the Constitution of the United States; whereupon the said conventions shall be, and are hereby, authorized to form constitutions and States governments for said proposed states, respectively. The constitutions shall be republican in form, and make no distinction in civil or political rights on account of race or color, except as to Indians not taxed, and not be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration of Independence. And said conventions shall provide, by ordinances irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of said States:

First. That perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured and that no inhabitant of said States shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship


State History Enabling Act[/QUOTE]

 

[Master PO]

Like I said - at least for those who live in the USA of reality and not a willful construct produced from their own extremist delusions.

how many times have you used this throughout the forum?....

 

[haymarket]

sorry wrong again..... i already posted it way back on this thread...but you don't listen!

enabling acts are used for many states.... stating the same thing on the DOI

Enabling Act



AN ACT to provide for the division of Dakota into two States and to enable the people of North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, and Washington to form constitutions and State governments and to be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, and to make donations of public lands to such States.

(Approved February 22, 1889.) [25 U.S. Statutes at Large, c 180 p 676.]

SEC. 4. That the delegates to the conventions elected as provided for in this act shall meet at the seat of government of each of said Territories, except the delegates elected in South Dakota, who shall meet at the city of Sioux Falls, on the fourth day of July, eighteen hundred and eighty-nine, and, after organization, shall declare, on behalf of the people of said proposed States, that they adopt the Constitution of the United States; whereupon the said conventions shall be, and are hereby, authorized to form constitutions and States governments for said proposed states, respectively. The constitutions shall be republican in form, and make no distinction in civil or political rights on account of race or color, except as to Indians not taxed, and not be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration of Independence. And said conventions shall provide, by ordinances irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of said States:

First. That perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured and that no inhabitant of said States shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship


State History Enabling Act

[/QUOTE]

States were admitting to the union who openly defecated upon the principles of the Declaration of Independence - especially the one you already cited about ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL and the rights they have. Its self serving pie in the sky holy sanctimonious nonsense which has no real application to the lives of anyone.

Nothing in there is binding on anyone - citizens or government.

 

[Master PO]

States were admitting to the union who openly defecated upon the principles of the Declaration of Independence - especially the one you already cited about ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL and the rights they have.

Deep desperation has set in!

 

[haymarket]

how many times have you used this throughout the forum?....

Each time it is appropriate when dealing with those who live in that mental condition.

 

[haymarket]

Deep desperation has set in!

Its simply truth and history and proves you do not know what you are talking about.

 

[Master PO]

Its simply truth and history and proves you do not know what you are talking about.

:2razz: you make me laugh at your antics..when you have to go in the direction you take...using words like extremist, defecated..it shows a breakdown.

but you have been doing this since i met you.

 

[Master PO]

You ain't real bright are you? There are states right now proclaiming people in various states can be treated differently by the government of the state. Some have welfare, some don't, some have SSM, some don't, some don't allow atheists to run for public office, most don't....
You are just very bizarrely misinformed.

if ever there was a person who has no knowledge of government, it would be you becuase you don't read.....

no where in a constitution of a state of the u.s....does it STATE....rights are granted by government, or that people will be treat differently by government.

if you read properly in the next post, maybe you will not be confused and wrong.

 

[haymarket]

:2razz: you make me laugh at your antics..when you have to go in the direction you take...using words like extremist, defecated..it shows a breakdown.

but you have been doing this since i met you.

Making an insulting personal attack against me is a very poor and sadly pathetic substitute for any refutation to the reality that the Dec of Ind DOES NOT say anything about admission of states to the union and what the rules are OR what rights government can create from that point on.

 

[Master PO]

Making an insulting personal attack against me is a very poor and sadly pathetic substitute for any refutation to the reality that the Dec of Ind DOES NOT say anything about admission of states to the union and what the rules are OR what rights government can create from that point on.

according to you everything is personal attack....

:lol:....the enabling law...says that [A state constitution] shall not be repugnant to the principles of DOI..

no state constitution shall STATE:.......that state government grants rights, that the government can treat people differently.

since the DOI lays the founding principles of america.

 

[Bodi]

Is this thread still going on...? :lol:

The DOI is not law...

 

[Master PO]

Is this thread still going on...? :lol:

The DOI is not law...

its not positive law..statute

its non positive law....

 

[haymarket]

according to you everything is personal attack.....

Your post most certainly was.

the enabling law...says that [A state constitution] shall not be repugnant to the principles of DOI..

When was this so called provision ever enforced?

since the DOI lays the founding principles of america.

Which as far as law goes are meaningless since they are not law and were never suppose to be law.

 

[Removable Mind]

Is this thread still going on...? :lol:

The DOI is not law...

No matter how much proof is provided...it's of no avail. Ernst will not yield to how Congress enacted a little bill to have 4 founding, historical documents placed into the "preface" of everything from the United States Statutes at Large (the repository of all laws, proclamations, executive orders, etc, etc, etc.) to the Senate Manual of Rules, Regulations, to the United States Code, yadda, yadda, yadda.

The reason Congress placed the documents in the various government documents and repository: A reminder of how this nation was established and its founding principles.

HOWEVER, Ernest's motive of this thread was to make the point that this nation is founded on "Natural Rights" that come from some higher source (whatever one chooses to believe that power to be) rather than "U.S. Civil Law", which came about from virtually centuries of events, which the Framers drew from to establish the Republic form of government, out Constitution, and of course the "Divorce Petition" sent to King George (who believed he had divine rights). The language used by a human being by the name of Thomas Jefferson who wrote some things about men are equal, creators, etc, etc, so obviously that proves that a higher power guided the hands of the Framers to write down the Bill of Rights.

It's a little stickier than how I've described it...but this is the gist.

 

[haymarket]

its not positive law..statute

its non positive law....

EB - do you know what a Boston cream pie is?

 

[Bodi]

No matter how much proof is provided...it's of no avail. Ernst will not yield to how Congress enacted a little bill to have 4 founding, historical documents placed into the "preface" of everything from the United States Statutes at Large (the repository of all laws, proclamations, executive orders, etc, etc, etc.) to the Senate Manual of Rules, Regulations, to the United States Code, yadda, yadda, yadda.

The reason Congress placed the documents in the various government documents and repository: A reminder of how this nation was established and its founding principles.

HOWEVER, Ernest's motive of this thread was to make the point that this nation is founded on "Natural Rights" that come from some higher source (whatever one chooses to believe that power to be) rather than "U.S. Civil Law", which came about from virtually centuries of events, which the Framers drew from to establish the Republic form of government, out Constitution, and of course the "Divorce Petition" sent to King George (who believed he had divine rights). The language used by a human being by the name of Thomas Jefferson who wrote some things about men are equal, creators, etc, etc, so obviously that proves that a higher power guided the hands of the Framers to write down the Bill of Rights.

It's a little stickier than how I've described it...but this is the gist.

When he gets into the positive / non-positive law garbage I just stop...