Welfare is only legal for those who are destitute and near death. Even Social Security. Welfare is never constitutional because it was never delegated by the constitution. See the proof below.
By Steven D. Miller
Church and State are separate. They each operate in their own realm.
- Charity is in the church realm. Love your neighbor as you would love yourself. In a system of faith, hope and charity. Even Webster defined religion to include your pious performance of your duty to God and to your fellow man. Taking care of widows and orphans is equated with “the perfect law of liberty” according to James chapter 1.
- Forced Welfare Contributions are in the State realm. In a system of force, fear and violence. Thou shalt not covet your neighbor’s wealth. You have no right to live more comfortably at the expense of your neighbor. Corban will nullify the word of God. Estate tax, Probate and Inheritance tax will take away homes from widows and orphans.
U.S. Laws are Founded on Biblical Principles
The overtaxed American British Colonies of 1776 wanted to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with their government. They were willing to risk death to do so. They wanted a government based on Biblical principles. Where every man was created equal, subject to the Laws of Nature and the Laws of Nature’s God. (The divine Laws of Nature are superior to us …“neither could any other law possibly exist for we are all created equal with no other superior than the author of our being”).
Don’t confuse charity with giving away things. Charity must be given to strengthen the less fortunate. Feeding the poor is NOT charity according to First Corinthians 13:3.
” And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profits me nothing.”
— First Corinthians 13:3
Don’t confuse government welfare systems with charity. One is done by forcing your neighbors to give; the other is done with love. It is your duty to love your neighbor and be your brother’s keeper.
Forced charity is not charity. It is theft. Forcing your neighbor to give, so that you can live more comfortably, is NOT charity — it is socialism. SOCIALISM CANNOT RECOGNIZE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wealth. So, did God’s laws change?
- Is it right to use the agents of government to force your neighbor to provide schools to educate your children so that you don’t have to?
- Is it right to use the agents of government to force your neighbor to provide health care for your elderly parents so that you don’t have to?
- Is it right to use the agents of government to force your neighbor to pave the roads so that you don’t have to? Or fight fires, or punish criminals?
All these things were once done privately. The first paved streets in America were paved by breweries to keep their wagons from sinking in the mud. Criminals were punished in the stockades, where everyone would be aware of the criminal’s reputation. Thieves made three-fold restitution. Three thefts of livestock were punished by chopping off a hand. Perjury against government was punished by slicing off both ears. We did not need jails.
We did not have a government for the first ten books of the Bible until Saul was elected as King — which was evil in the eyes of the Lord, First Samuel 12:17. The history of early America, from the Mayflower to William Penn’s Pennsylvania, was a history of fleeing from centralized authority to bring forth on this continent a new nation conceived in liberty.
No form of collectivism can recognize individual rights. Today’s examples are obvious. If the neighbor cannot give, then their bank account will be seized, their wages garnished, they will be evicted from their home by brutal force and their home sold to collect the tax. This is force, not love of neighbor. Saul did a foolish thing. First Samuel 13:13. He forced a direct tax, because his nation was about to be invaded.
The LORD Himself warned you in First Samuel 8:5-17 that government will tax, tax, tax, tax and tax until you cannot stand it (and back then the income tax was just 10%). You were warned that your elected king would take, take, take until society collectively wants God back into their life, but God will not answer your prayers (God honored your free-will, you got what you wanted, stop complaining). First Samuel 8:18 “And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, and the LORD will not hear you in that day.”
- Galatians 5:15 If you bite and devour each other you yourself will be consumed.
- Romans 11:9 the Apostle Paul repeated King David’s warning that government benefits are a snare to trap you.
- Genesis 14:23 don’t accept anything, not even a shoelace, from a king.
“When we were convinced that it was no longer a sin to desire benefits at the expense of our neighbor “Faith, Hope, and Charity began to flee out of our Church”.
— The Twelve Conclusions of the Lollards, The First Conclusion.
Ben Franklin’s observations of welfare
Long before the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin, while he was the British Postmaster General of the American Colonies in 1766, wrote about the European crop failures and the care of the poor. Here is his only paragraph on welfare.
“For my own part, I am not so well satisfied of the goodness of this thing. I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. There is no country in the world where so many provisions are established for them; so many hospitals to receive them when they are sick or lame, founded and maintained by voluntary charities; so many alms-houses for the aged of both sexes, together with a solemn general law made by the rich to subject their estates to a heavy tax for the support of the poor. Under all these obligations, are our poor modest, humble, and thankful; and do they use their best endeavours to maintain themselves, and lighten our shoulders of this burthen? On the contrary, I affirm that there is no country in the world in which the poor are more idle, dissolute, drunken, and insolent. The day you passed that act, you took away from before their eyes the greatest of all inducements to industry, frugality, and sobriety, by giving them a dependance on somewhat else than a careful accumulation during youth and health, for support in age or sickness. In short, you offered a premium for the encouragement of idleness, and you should not now wonder that it has had its effect in the increase of poverty. Repeal that law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. St. Monday, and St. Tuesday, will cease to be holidays. Six days shalt thou labour, though one of the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them.”
— Price of Corn, and Management of the Poor
Printed in The London Chronicle, November 27–29, 1766
The socialism in Christ’s time was called corban. This is not the Old Testament “Qorban” which brings us close to God. (Strong’s H7133 which has 82 occurrences in the Old Testament, translated as offering or sacrifice) as a voluntary system of welfare contributions. Corban, in the New Testament, is a forced contribution. it will make the word of God of none affect (Mark 7:13). This is also known as the Corban of the Pharisees.
Political activists influence Congress to force their neighbors to give. This is theft. These socialists believe “Efficient rationing by the State would allow everyone to have the ability to get everything they need to have at least close to the same quality of life as everyone else.” — as if your money was theirs.
Paul repeated King David’s warning that government charity would be a snare to trap you. Romans 11:9
The original Apostles knew that their social welfare system must be charity, not forced contributions. Example
:13 For, brothers, you have been called to liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
:15 But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you be not consumed one of another.
“But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.”
― Frederic Bastiat, The Law
The FDR socialists set a snare in 1935 and you voluntarily agreed to take a bite out of your neighbor. You agreed to one purse of socialism. Proverbs 1:14-19 warned you about one purse. It warns you to not walk in their path.
The FDR socialists had a plan. Neglect no one. Tax the rich. Pay your fair share. Meet the social needs of society by relying on forced payments instead of charity.
Their system of force, fear and violence will replace the love of neighbor. Now we have at least three generations of socialists. Proverbs chapter 1 warned us what kind of people socialists are: they run to evil, eager to set traps for their own life, greedy for gain which destroys their own lives.
Yet today we see many people voluntarily sign up for a Social Security Number so they can take a bite out of each other, and think nothing about being consumed by the over-taxation that afflicted our ancestors in 1776. This covetous practice has cursed your children, just as you were warned in Second Peter 2:14. Liberty only comes with responsibility, just as is implied in Galatians 5:13, quoted above.
In Genesis 3:19 the unchanging Lord of the Bible requires you to earn your bread from the sweat of your face. This principle was still true when Abraham Lincoln gave his second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865:
It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces…”
That’s right. Forced welfare contributions are just as immoral as slavery. Welfare and slavery are the same thing. It is using laws to force others to provide you with the fruits of another man’s labor. If you expect others to provide what you want, then you are as corrupt as a slave owner. Bullies who want to force their will on others (by slavery or by vote) have always ganged up together and used fascism to dominate others.
WELFARE FOR INDIVIDUALS IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL
“Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
— James Madison, Speech to the House of Representatives during the debate “On the Memorial of the Relief Committee of Baltimore, for the Relief of St. Domingo Refugees” January 10, 1794
Government powers must be delegated by the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment says that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states or people. WELFARE is nowhere delegated to the federal government. Here are the proofs.
When the proposed Constitution was being debated in the State Senates, many people were suspicious that the term “general welfare” would authorize welfare to individuals.
The general welfare clause in Article 1, Section 8 of your Constitution reads:
“The Congress shall have Power to … provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;…”
It is an introductory phrase that is followed, after the semi-colon, by a list of the 18 specific ways the new government would be authorized to provide for the general welfare. Establish post offices, coin money, make treaties, establish standard weights and measures, provide for a Navy, punish pirates, punish counterfeiting, fund a temporary army, declare war, and exercise exclusive jurisdiction over all cases in the future District of Columbia, etc.
To counter those rumors that the “general welfare” clause in the proposed Constitution would authorize any kind of welfare, James Madison, in Federalist Paper #41, explained its clear intent. He stated that it “is an absurdity” to claim that the General Welfare clause confounds or misleads, because this introductory clause is followed by enumeration of specific particulars that explain and qualify the meaning of phrase “general welfare”. That’s right! Your Constitution was ratified under the assurance that it would never be interpreted to provide welfare to individuals.
This was true when Samuel Adams told the greedy anti-freedom opportunists to “crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.” — speech at the Pennsylvania State House, August 1, 1776.
This was true January 10, 1704 when James Madison addressed the Third Congress on the debate to appropriate funds to provide relief for Haitian refugees pouring into New England from war-torn Haiti.
“Charity is no part of the legislative duty of government. It would puzzle any gentleman to lay his finger on any part of the Constitution which would authorize the government to interpose in the relief of…sufferers.”
This was still true when Congressman Davy Crockett made his famous “it is not yours to give” speech. It is not their money to give, not even for disaster relief in a federal territory.
President Franklin Pierce in 1854 vetoed our nation’s first health care bill — a bill to help the mentally ill. His veto said
“I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity…. [this] would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.”
This was still true in 1897 when President Grover Cleveland vetoed an appropriation to provide disaster aid to victims of a Texas drought. His veto stated:
I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds… I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution. The lesson should be constantly enforced that though the people should support the government, the government should not support the people.“
Footnote: 1897 was 2 years after the Supreme Court ruled that income tax was unconstitutional in Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan Co., (first case 157 US 429, second case 158 U.S. 601).
As you can see from our heritage, charity was never a government function. Socialists always run out of other peoples’ money, but it is not even theirs to give.
Social Security did not exist until the FDR socialists created it in 1935. It was only available to those who qualify for federal funds. The Social Security Act, Section 205(c)(2)(B)(i)(II), requires applicants for Social Security Numbers to be an “applicant for or recipient of benefits under any program financed in whole or in part by Federal funds”
But unfortunately for you, the only people who can qualify for benefits under any program financed by federal funds are those who are completely destitute, are near death, are willing to confess that they cannot manage their own affairs (even old age planning), and they seek federal funds by signing up with the federal government.
Socialism is unconstitutional. Various authorities allow only indigent persons to be eligible for programs funded by federal funds. But to qualify for federal funds you must be indigent without property, as explained below, “…only persons who are presently destitute of property and without resources to obtain the necessities of life, and who have no relatives or friends able and willing to support them.” THAT’S RIGHT. You never qualified for a SSN. You falsified a federal form to gain a benefit that you never qualified for.
Original Intent of government’s founders
A CANCER SORE WHICH EATS TO THE HEART OF THE CONSTITUTION
Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 19, 1787. Thomas Jefferson. In the paragraph starting at the bottom of page 290:
“Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition. … The mobs of great cities add just so much to the support of pure government, as sores do to the strength of the human body. It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigour. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution.”
[Venality is the condition of being susceptible to bribery or corruption. The use of a position of trust for dishonest gain. The American Heritage Dictionary]
Why would he mention subservience?
Actions speak louder than words. You are a slave to whom you obey. (Romans 6:16 and Second Peter 2:19). Once you salute your new master you have acknowledged that you are the inferior, no longer equal. “The civil laws reduce an ungrateful freedman to his original slavery” Libertinum ingratum leges civiles in pristinam servitutem redigunt.
Welcome to your Novus Ordo Seclorum secular new world order.
Saul did a foolish thing (First Samuel 13:9-13). He forced charity because his nation was about to be attacked. Forced charity is not charity. It is contrary to the laws of nature and nature’s God.
CAN WELFARE EXIST?
Question: So how can welfare be constitutional?
Answer: Anyone can ignore the law and step in to save someone’s life. There is a very narrow exception to the unconstitutionality of welfare. Government can ignore the Constitution to save a life. A welfare safety net is only for saving someone’s life. All other handouts are fraud.
Here is how it works. Welfare, such as for example, Social Security, is only available to a person “who is an applicant for or recipient of any program financed in whole or in part from Federal funds” — according to section 205(c)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Social Security Act. But the only federal funds that are Constitutional are for saving a life. When the SS Act was written the poor laws allowed welfare ONLY to those who are completely destitute to the extent explained by the 1941 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Edwards v. California 314 US 172. This was the common understanding in 1941 of who can qualify for welfare:
“…only persons who are presently destitute of property and without resources to obtain the necessities of life, and who have no relatives or friends able and willing to support them.”
There is ONLY one Constitutional loophole to provide welfare, even Social Security, to individual people. Government has a duty (called by various names — “compelling state interest” or “police power”, “exigent circumstances”, “interests that the state may lawfully protect” or “overriding governmental interest”, or “clear and present danger doctrine”) to prevent an individual’s death. Anyone, including government, can break the law to save a life.
You can become a permanent ward of government. All you have to do is request that government save your life by applying for relief under any program funded by federal funds.
And the Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of Social Security (they left the question open in Steward Machine Co. v. Davis 301 US 548, and Helvering v. Davis 301 US 619). More… They cannot rule on the constitutionality of a law brought by someone who has availed himself of the law’s benefits. (according to their rules set down in the Ashwander case). And the politics of state courts will never allow a case to reach the Supreme Court. It will be dismissed on other grounds rather than destroy the political machine.
WELFARE IS A CHURCH AND FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY, NOT A GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITY.
Welfare cannot be provided by the US Government and still be Constitutional. Welfare remains a church and family responsibility.
Welfare (including Social Security) is prohibited by the Constitution, except to those who are absolutely destitute and near death. Social Security numbers can only be assigned to those who register to accept federal benefits (according to section 205(c)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Social Security Act). and to aliens (after 1972).
This is the only one Constitutional way to qualify for welfare. But you must give up your rights when you give up your responsibility to take care of yourself. Since rights only come with responsibilities, once you give up all your rights you are forever considered as a ward of the system.
Those who cannot take care of themselves must “…take the will of him on who he depends…” as Blackstone so eloquently stated. They have no say in how they are treated. There is no remedy for someone who is damaged when he “sees another managing his affairs and does not interfere to prevent it”. It is just like in John 21:18: when you are old (cannot take care of yourself) you will stretch out your hand and someone will lead you where you do not want to go.
This welfare-for-wards function will waive all your rights. Rights are “susceptible to restriction only to prevent grave and immediate danger to interests that the state may lawfully protect”. But you waived your rights by applying for benefits funded, in whole or in part, by federal funds.
Getting a Social Security Number waives your religious rights to “overriding governmental interest” according to the Supreme Court in U.S. v. Lee (455 US 252).
If you accepted welfare under any other circumstance other than grave and immediate danger of death, then you were fraudulently induced to participate in unlawful means to raid the Treasury. Proverbs 21:6: “The getting of treasures by a lying tongue is a vanity tossed to and fro of them that seek death.”
WELFARE IS ONLY FOR PAUPERS
A pauper is one who is supported by public funds. Paupers cannot have rights. The Articles of Confederation excluded paupers from ANY rights of citizenship. Article IV of the Articles of Confederation requires “… the free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States; . . .”
Busser v. Snyder, 37 ALR 1515:
An Old Age Assistance Law is prohibited by a constitutional provision that no appropriation shall be made for charitable or benevolent purposes to any person.”
People v. Shirley, 92 ALR 2d 413, indexed under the topic Poor Laws:
The provisions of the welfare code are to be administered fairly, with due consideration not only for the needs of applicants but also for the safeguarding of public funds; if children are not in need, they are not eligible for assistance regardless of who is paying for their support.”
Even Old Age Assistance is prohibited by your Constitution.
Also in the Busser case:
The term ‘poor,’ as used by lawmakers, describes those who are destitute and helpless, unable to support themselves, and without means of support.”
YOU WAIVE YOUR RIGHTS
If you cannot take care of yourself, how could you expect the rights of citizenship? John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government Chapter 15 asks the question “For what compact can be made with a man that is not master of his own life?”
Once you register for socialism, others will represent you. This maxim of law is known as tacit procuration. This basic law extends much deeper than welfare. You no longer have a right to contract. You are incompetent to represent yourself, and must be represented by a competent attorney.
Christ told his disciples in Luke 22:25 that those who call themselves benefactors will exercise authority over us.
Christians will not force others to provide for them. Second Thessalonians 3:6-14 prohibits Christians from associating with freeloaders.
But welfare comes at a higher price. You owe allegiance to your benefactors. Jesus Christ said in Luke 22:25: “… they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.” Those who accept benefits do so only by a pledge of allegiance to a worldly master. Perhaps you’ve chosen the wrong provider-lord-master. Christ said that Corban (the Roman system of forced welfare contributions, not the earlier charity system by the same name) nullifies the word of God.
Those who manage themselves will never accept socialist benefits. There is a Maxim of law: “No one can unjustly enrich himself at the expense of others” “It is not just that any one should be enriched by the detriment of others” æquum est neminem cum alterius detrimento fieri locupletiorem. (this creates a constructive contract that courts enforce “as arise when the law prescribes the rights and liabilities of persons…similar to the rights and liabilities in cases of express contract”). Also look up “constructive fraud”. For more information see my book The Citizen Cannot Complain.
ALSO RELATED TO THE GENERAL WELFARE ARE SAFETY REGULATIONS.
US Supreme Court in Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co. 295 U.S. 330:
“The catalog of means and actions which might be imposed upon an employer in any business, tending to the satisfaction and comfort of his employees, seems endless. Provision for free medical attendance, nursing, clothing, food, housing, and education of children, and a hundred other matters might with equal propriety by proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. Can it fairly be said that the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to the prescription of any or all of these things? Is it not apparent that they are really and essentially related solely to the social welfare of the worker, and therefore remote from any regulation of commerce as such? We think the answer is plain. These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power.” [May 6, 1935]
Read that again. The welfare of workers cannot be regulated. Benefits for “the social welfare of the worker” cannot be “imposed upon an employer in any business.” No Unemployment Insurance, no Worker’s Compensation, no minimum wage, no mandatory disability insurance, first-aid, health or safety (OSHA) regulation, no health care benefits, no forced Social Security contributions.
SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY FOR YOURSELVES AND YOUR POSTERITY?
In a free country, people manage their own affairs. Just Imagine what life would be like living in a socialist country where you would be forced (by brutal force of tax seizures, if necessary, rather than by the blessing of charitable giving) to provide bread for your neighbors from your labor. You would be no better than a slave. In fact, slaves under Pharaoh only paid 20% of their earnings in tax.
When there was seven years of famine under Pharaoh, people who wanted to survive sold all their land, their cattle and all their possessions to Pharaoh in exchange for food. The next year they had nothing, so they sold themselves into slavery (including all future generations — until God canceled the contract 400 years later). In Genesis 47:23-26 SLAVES OWNED BY PHARAOH HAD A 20% INCOME TAX and were allowed to keep 80%. This was during a time of economic disaster when they were recovering from a famine. If you pay more than 20% tax, even in times of economic disaster, then you are worse off than a slave. Or stated more correctly, if your living allowance (paycheck) is less than 80% then you are worse off than a slave. Today’s expenditure of federal, state and local governments is 50% of the gross national product. If you think you are below the 50% tax bracket, you didn’t add all the other taxes and don’t forget to count your share of the increase in the national debt and “unfunded liabilities”.
In the medieval dark ages, a serf only had to work 14 weeks out of the year (26% of the year) to provide for himself, his family, and his lord or King. The rest of his time could be spent building magnificent cathedrals and Opera houses. Painting fine art or sculpting. Making clocks and discovering science.
Then the U.S. overcame a great depression, won World War 2 in less than 4 years, and rebuilt the rest of the world.
In the 1960s we still needed only one breadwinner per household, until President Johnson’s War On Poverty, then by 1980 we needed two. Then by 1990s daddy government was the head of household. Spot the trend.
True or False Quiz:
- Governments are instituted among men to protect rights, not to destroy rights.
- A right cannot be taxed.
- You have a right to earn wages.
- If you waive your right to earn wages, then your wages can be taxed.
* ~ ~ ~ *
‘Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery’
* ~ ~ ~ *
YOU MAY ALSO BE INTERESTED IN
From whom do the kings of the earth take tribute? My essay that proves you are taxed as a foreigner.
If you want to know why you cannot protest your slavery, read my book The Citizen Cannot Complain.
* ~ ~ ~ *