Men defend their families which is why we created a government. It is why we go to war. When the State kidnaps your children, will you surrender your family, or will you use their laws to punish the kidnappers? Child protective Services (CPS, or in some states DCF, DSS, DHS, DCFS, FIA, OCS) cannot investigate alleged child abuse or interview a child on private property without exigent circumstances or probable cause, or parent’s permission.
Investigative interview of a child constitutes an unreasonable “search and seizure” Doe v. Heck No. 01-3648 (2003) found that a “no prior consent” interview was a clear violation of parent’s constitutional rights.
Hurlman v. Rice (1991) The mere possibility of danger does not constitute an emergency or exigent circumstance that would justify a warrantless search of a home or seizure of a child.
Quilloin v. Walcott 434 US 246, 155 (1978) It is a due process violation when the state breaks up a family solely on a “best interest” analysis that is not supported by proof of parental unfitness.
You have a right to make your own decisions about your children. Back in the old days we had a word for this. We called it liberty. Liberty is a constitutionally guaranteed right. The U.S. Supreme Court in a homeschool case, Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 US 390, at page 399 gave a partial definition of liberty:
The term Liberty “… denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint, but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, to establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his/her own conscience… the established doctrine is that this liberty may not be interfered with under the guise of protecting public interest, by legislative action which is arbitrary or without reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the state to effect.”
Leviticus 25:10 Proclaim Liberty Throughout the Land.
In 1993 a federal court ruled in Qutb v. Strauss, 11 F3d 488: “Parents right to rear children without undue governmental interference is a fundamental component of due process.”
Swipies v. Kofka, 348 F3d 701 (2003):
Parents have a liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children. See Manzano, 60 F.3d at 509. This interest can be limited by the state’s compelling interest in protecting a child: “the parental liberty interest in keeping the family unit intact is not a clearly established right in the context of reasonable suspicion that parents may be abusing children.” See Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1462 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 828, 108 S.Ct. 97, 98 L.Ed.2d 58 (1987). “[W]hen a state official pursuing a child abuse investigation takes an action which would otherwise unconstitutionally disrupt familial integrity, he or she is entitled to qualified immunity, if such action is properly founded upon a reasonable suspicion of child abuse.” Manzano, 60 F.3d at 510-11.
Don’t be fooled by their term “reasonable suspicion”. It must be an objectively reasonable suspicion, not just a hunch. Don’t be fooled when the State kidnaps your children.
Jenkins v. Rock Hill School District, 513 F3d 580 (2008):
“parents have a liberty interest in the care, custody, and control of their children. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65, 120 S.Ct. 2054, 147 L.Ed.2d 49 (2000); see also Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 535, 45 S.Ct. 571, 69 L.Ed. 1070 (1925) (Fourteenth Amendment prevents “unreasonably interfering with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control.”); Barrett v. Steubenville City Schools, 388 F.3d 967, 972 (6th Cir. 2004) (noting the fundamental right of parents to raise their child has been clearly established); Johnson v. City of Cincinnati, 310 F.3d 484, 499 (6th Cir.2002) (“[A] family member’s right to participate in child rearing and education is one of the most basic and important associational rights protected by the Constitution.”).
1943 WL 54417 (U.S.) Appeal brief to the U.S. Supreme Court from Massachusetts in the 1943 case of Prince v. Massachusetts:
“The prosecution of appellant through misapplication of the statute is a step toward destroying one of the oldest and fundamental institutions of society, namely, the family. The family is the backbone of all orderly governments. It is to democracy what blood is to the human body. Drain away the warm family relationship and substitute the cold foster-parental care of the government and democracy will perish as surely as will the body when the blood ceases to circulate. If the individual in a democracy is to retain his integrity the family relations must not be impaired by misapplied laws. The strength of the nation depends upon the security of the family and family life.”
Note that this is the same Prince v Massachusetts case that the Illinois Supreme Court said was their basis for limiting parental roles.
Don’t be fooled when the State kidnaps your children.
If you want to challenge the loss of your rights, I recommend an online law course for those who will fight against the powers-that-be. It has save me and it might just be your get-out-of-jail card. HowToWinInCourt.com
America was founded on two millennia of ethical values. Nowhere in the Bible does divorce cancel a marriage. Divorce in the Bible only refers to living separately. Even the U.S. Supreme Court in 1888 said that “marriage is a relation for life”.
Question: How did marriage change from “the basis of civilized society and of sound morals…” in 1841 where it was considered by lawyers to be “the source of all natural relations of mankind… the source of all industry and economy…. The origin of all subordination and government, and consequently of all peace and safety in the world, and, finally the foundation of all religion, …” — to today’s contempt for family values?
Answer: lawyers changed the definition of marriage.
Question: How did the crime of adultery change from a felony which was also the greatest of civil injuries “… wherein the damages recovered are usually very large and exemplary.” — to a protected right?
Answer: lawyers changed the definition of marriage.
Question: How did marriage change from “a relation for life” in 1888, to a contract with the State for a disposable spouse?
Answer: lawyers changed the definition of marriage.
Question: How did courts get the authority to seize half of the family wealth and give it as a reward for the — now unpunishable — crime of adultery? Even though traditional family values clearly say:
Question: How did children become property of the State?
Hint: Law textbooks used in early America said “bastards are not looked upon as children to any civil purposes”.
Answer: lawyers changed the definition of marriage.
Question: How did THE crime against nature become protected by government, when it had always been more detestable than child rape?
Answer: lawyers changed the definition of marriage.
The Supreme Court recently determined that a Christian baker can refuse to bake a cake for homosexuals. Yet enraged liberals still demand Christian approval of those who publicly brag about their reprobate sexual perversions.
The anti-Christian agenda
The gay agenda is not about flaunting sexual perversion in public. It is about the destruction of Christianity. Homosexuals hate Christians because Christians cannot be tolerant of perversions. The homosexuals of Romans 1:26 and 27 are worthy of death, as are those who tolerate them (Romans 1:32). That’s right! Christians must not tolerate homosexuals. The pride parade mentioned in Isaiah 3:9 continues their march to hell and they want everyone to join them.
Liberals have no moral compass. Liberals like to redefine words in their never-ending battle against truth, justice and the American Way. They want to play God until traditional values are unenforceable They want to reaffirm among themselves that violating millennia of moral laws will have no consequences. God invented sex with consequences. Liberals don’t want to be bothered. Liberals even kill 3,000 babies a day and they call it health care. They have no concept that it is idolatry to invent a more permissive god of their own choosing.
If you want to scan the moral battlefield for scraps of truth, then keep reading.
In 1986 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 US 186:
To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching.”
It is the Laws of Nature that entitle governments to exist. The government’s authority to execute murderers comes from the same divine Laws of Nature. Yet today’s courts protect THE crime against nature. A crime that has always been more detestable than other crimes against nature such as murder or child rape. Courts once venerated as “the pure fountain of justice” are now polluted by the perversion, filth and shame of homosex advocacy.
The Planned Destruction of Morals
Liberal globalists want a one-world government. But they must first destroy all existing governments. Public acceptance of homosexuals is part of the ongoing plan to destroy America. The moral fabric of the universe is hanging by a thread. The future of mankind hangs in the balance*.
Throughout history, both Christians and pagans had similar values. Values that would preserve their society from decay. The Goths would bury them alive. Romans would crucify them (both Justinian Code 9.9.31 and Theodosianus Code 9.7.6). The Brits would burn them at the stake. Homosex was punished by death in England up to 1861 and in Canada (enforcing our shared English common law) until 1869. The received-law-of-the-land in America proclaims that sodomy is “more detestable” than child rape.
The law of nature is “binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this”*. Yet Satan’s disciples have gained such a political force that only a few countries still punish homosexuals. By what authority did the U.S. Supreme Court allow homosex just because a UN report that said some countries tolerate homosexuals?
Crime against nature are to be punished
The first sentence of the Declaration of Independence says that the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle the United States to exist. The Constitution goes on to state that we are endowed by our Creator with unailenable rights. If the United States is entitled to exist, then these divine natural laws endow us with the right to punish homosexuals. Here are the authorities to prove it.
Every Law Dictionary will tell you Peccata contra naturam sunt gravissima. But Black’s Law Dictionary 1999 edition changed the translation. Their lawyers did not like the English word heinous.
We execute criminals out of our love for our neighbors. Driving out evil is love, not hate. Millennia of moral teaching requires it. Whereas using a public office to protect such offenders will “cut up government by the roots, and poison the very fountain of public security.” (quote from John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government, section 222)
“This law of nature, being coeval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other — It is binding over all the globe in all countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this: and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original…. neither could any other law possibly exist… for we are all equal, without any other superior but him who is the author of our being. … Nay, if any human law should allow [violation of natural law], we are bound to transgress that human law, or else we must offend both the natural and the divine.” (Blackstone’s Commentaries)
The unchanging Lord of the Bible is not going to change just because someone told you to tolerate child rape or homosexuals. We are still one nation under God.
Murder is only A crime against nature. Child rape is only A crime against nature. Consensual homosexual sodomy is THE crime against nature. It is traditionally punished more harshly than lesser crimes against nature.
YOUR DUTY TO ENFORCE TRADITIONAL VALUES
Ignorance of the law of nature, which every one is bound to know, excuses no man.1 It is a crime to not report a crime. Acting and consenting adults are liable to the same punishment. It is a crime to not report crimes against nature such as murder, child rape or homosex.
“the right of punishing crimes against the law of nature, as murder and the like, is in a state of mere nature vested in every individual” 2
The Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle the United States to exist.3 We are one nation under God. The received law of the land continues until cancelled by the legislature with “express words of nullity”4 but no congressman can cancel the authority for his government to exist.5
John Locke’s Second Treatise Of Government states that a government that would not execute the laws would be “politics inconceivable to human capacity, and inconsistent with human society.”
When laws imposed by the state fail, we must act by the law of nature. 6
We must then “bear the sword of justice by the consent of the whole community. And to this precedent natural power of individuals must be referred that right [even foreign diplomats could be executed] in case they have offended, not indeed against the municipal laws of the country, but against the divine laws of nature, and become liable thereby to forfeit their lives for their guilt.”7
Contracts that are made against good morals have no force.8 And agreements founded upon an immoral consideration are not to be observed.9
We do not execute murderers because we hate. We execute murderers because we love our neighbors. Murder is a crime against nature. THE Crime against nature (Sodomy) is has always been a crime more detestable than murder.
It is your duty to speak out against evil. You will suffer the consequence of what your neighbors have tolerated. Just as General Douglas MacArthur warned us in his speech December 12, 1951:
History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.”
The English language in the United States defines religion as the performance of all known duties to your fellow man. You are to drive out evil from your society. We punish crimes against nature because we love our neighbors. It is love, it is not hate. Again: the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence declares that the Laws of Nature entitle the U.S. to exist. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot tolerate Crimes against nature AND also have a legitimate government.
BIBLICAL VALUES
The Christian Bible tells us that the unchanging God of the Bible gave homosexuals over to a reprobate mind so that they might be destroyed. (Romans 1:28)
Prior to the existence of any Jewish law, the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for tolerating homosexuals. Even Lot was affected by this tolerance of perversion. This was in 1896 BC, long before the first Jew existed. Don’t blame Jewish laws for the universal precept requiring capital punishment for homosex.
Leviticus 20:13 “They must be put to death….” according to the NIV Bible translation. “They shall surely be put to death” is the KJV translation. Leviticus 20 is not the law of Moses, it is the law of the LORD according to verses 7,8. Leviticus 18:26 is a command from God requiring everyone in the nation to keep God’s law and prohibits everyone, including foreigners, from committing such abominations.
In Genesis 18 the unchanging Lord Himself appeared in physical form to Abraham, along with two angels. The Lord was here on earth to supervise the genocide of Sodom and Gomorrah. To burn to death the homosexuals and kill those, like Lot’s wife, who tolerated them.
And in the Christian times (in Romans 1:26,27,32) we learn that homosexuals “are worthy of death” (direct quote from King James Bible) as are those who approve of them. These words are in your Bible.
Jude said homosexuals will burn in eternal fire. In Romans 1:26, 27, 28 God Himself gives them over to a reprobate mind so that they will be condemned. Verse 31 says they are worthy of death, as are those who tolerate them. This LAW HAS NOT CHANGED IN TWO MILLENNIA. By the way, it is still a crime to tolerate (not report) a felony. And today the maxim of law still requires consenting adults to be liable to the same punishments as the criminals.
King Asa was one of the most righteous kings in the Bible. First Kings 15:11-12 (KJV):
And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father. And he took away the sodomites out of the land, ….”
As did Asa’s son Jehoshaphat in First Kings 22:46.
As did King Josiah in Second Kings 23:7.
And he brake down the houses of the sodomites”
The righteous drive out evil. Driving out evil is not hate, it is love. The righteous will enjoy the fruit of their deeds. Disaster is upon the wicked. The wicked will suffer the consequence of what they have done.
Isaiah 3:8-11 (NIV translation):
… The look on their faces testifies against them; they parade their sin like Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to them! They have brought disaster upon themselves. Tell the righteous it will be well with them, for they will enjoy the fruit of their deeds. Woe to the wicked! Disaster is upon them! They will be paid back for what their hands have done.
Notice that Isaiah 3:9 mentions a pride parade. Disaster is upon the wicked.
The Christian Bible gives these warnings. Confirm them for yourself:
Homosexuals know the due punishment for their perversion (Romans 1:27). They know that they will suffer the punishment of eternal fire according to Jude verse 7: “Sodom and Gomorrah … serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire”. They know that they cannot go to heaven according to Galatians 5:19 and First Corinthians 6:9.
Romans 1:26,27,32 lesbians and sodomites “are worthy of death”. But Romans 1:32 continues. It imputes this death punishment to those who merely tolerate – the NIV and the New King James Version both use the phrase “approve of those who practice”. The Amplified Bible uses the term “tolerate” – these crimes. This leads up to a promise of reconciliation for the repentant four verses later, and warnings of wrath for those who reject the truth.
First Corinthians 6:9-10 Tells us that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God. The King James translation put it this way: “nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. . .” 10
First Timothy 1:9-10 “Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane,.. For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind … “10
Both Peter and Jude refer to homosexuals as beasts. Peter called them unthinking11 beasts to be caught and destroyed. (Second Peter 2:12)
Cursed is he who keeps his sword from bloodshed. Jeremiah 48:10.
Cowards shall have their place in the lake of fire. Revelation 21:8.
he Jewish law is more explicit than these Christian precepts. Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 are explicit punishments for consensual homosex, not rape. In Leviticus 20 the LORD gave his laws for his people. Homosexuals in verse 13, were to be driven out of society by the death penalty. Five verses earlier in the same chapter of Leviticus has instructions from the unchanging God of the Bible. Leviticus 20:8 (KJV) “And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am the LORD which sanctify you.”
It is your duty to speak out against evil.
Contra negantem principia non est disputandum. There can be no debate with one who denies principles.
“All unnatural carnal copulations, whether with man or beast” are to be harshly punished. The reprobate community wants you to believe that only forcible sodomy can be punished. Such as that depicted in the painting by Edouard Henri Avril.
* For more information read my book Defense of Marriage — Part 2 — Crimes Against Nature. (Here…)
Maxim of law: Ignorantia juris quod quisque tenetur scire, neminem excusat.
Blackstone’s Book 4, Public Wrongs, page 7. The U.S. Supreme Court confirms that Blackstone’s law encyclopedia was part of the received law of the land.
According to the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence
U.S. Supreme Court, as for example, in the marriage case Meister v. Moore
Their oath-of-office to uphold the Constitution that created their office
Maxim of law: Legibus sumptis desinentibus, lege naturae utendum est.
Blackstone’s introduction to Book 4. The U.S. Supreme Court confirms that Blackstone’s law encyclopedia was part of the received law of the land.
Maxim of law Pacta quae contra bonos mores fiunt nullam vim habere
Maxim of law Pacta quae turpem causam continent non sunt observanda
See Strong’s Concordance Lexicon reference 733 for a definition of “them that defile themselves with mankind” άρσενοκοίτης a sodomite.
άλογα — unthinking, irrational, without reason, unreasonable, absurd
