19 yr old cant prove she's a citizen.

[dgiharris]

She could be a lot of things. like a lying activist for illegal immigration.

You'd have to ask them. A bigger question is how do we know for sure where she was born?

As much as I hate MachZer0's posts, he has a point and this is why this young woman is screwed.

This is a chicken and egg Catch-22 bureaucratic nightmare. You can't take this to court because you have no documentation <=> You can't get documentation unless you take this to court .

 

[dgiharris]

As for homeschoolers and children of homeschoolers. I've met about 7 homeschool families and what struck me as a bit scary was the culture of homeschoolers. Feels like they regard their homes as kingdoms unto themselves and their kids as property in the 1700s sense of how kids where regarded.

The homeschooled families I met joined a small church and that church was the ONLY social outlet the kids had to meet and interact with other kids. And when I say kids I mean ages 5 - 17.

The thing that broke my heart was a 16 yr old named Robbie who was a very nice and social kid, but he was so lonely. His loneliness and despair radiated off of him like a sun. Robbie was smart, his IQ had to be north of 130, and he was good looking and managed to develop some athleticism despite his parents severely limiting his access to the outside world. His parents were very strict, he wasn't allowed to talk on the phone, no cable TV only what he could get reception wise the old fashion way, wasn't allowed to see any movies above PG rating, he could only go out for social church functions on Sun for a few hours and had to be home by 8pm.

Myself and a few of the other teenagers of the church decided to work on his parents and we would go to his house and "try" to hang out with him but of course the parents didn't much like that. However, since we were all from the same church the parents would allow us to hang out with him on Saturdays for an entire hour (sometimes 2 if they were feeling magnanimous )

He begged his parents to allow him to go to my highschool, he wanted to play football and basketball but his parents refused. To be honest, it felt like his parents did everything in their power so he wouldn't have any friends.

The day he turned 18, he packed up his belongings, took the ASVAB and joined the ARMY and never talked to his parents again.

His younger brother did the same thing 3 years later.

It's been over 15 years and to my knowledge they still haven't spoken to their parents and likewise the parents regard both kids as ungrateful and have "disowned" them.

FWIW, the other homeschool families I knew were happy and much less strict in limiting their kids social development. In fact, some of them let their kids go to the local high school. So not to say all homeschool families are social prisons.

but I just remember what my friend Robbie went through and I can easily see someone like him having the exact same problem this girl is having. His parents were borderline abusive in their treatment of him, like he was their property.

 

[CaDan]

To put this citizenship thing in a much simpler frame, here's a court case from 1865:

"You have heard some discussion as to the meaning of this term 'citizenship of the United States.' It has a plain, simple, everyday meaning, and that meaning you may safely take, without a definition, is that unequivocal relation between every American and his country which binds him to allegiance and pledges to him protection." United States v. Darnod, 25 Federal Case Number 14,915 page 763.​

I tracked down U.S. v. Darnaud, 25 F.Cas. 754, 762-63 (C.C.E.D.Pa. 1855). The case predates the Fourteenth Amendment, since it is from 1855 not 1865.

Further, the issue here is one of statutory construction--that is, how the term "citizen" in 1820 Act Suppressing the Slave Trade is defined. The indented portion quoted in this post is also cut off in the middle of a sentence, although the quotation does not note that. Here's the whole thing (although the paragraph goes on quite a bit longer):

Of all the charges in this second class [note: these are criminal charges of being the American owner of a ship engaged in the slave trade] it is an essential element that the accused was a citizen of the United States at the time of the acts. You have heard some discussion as to the meaning of this term, citizenship of the United States. It has a plain, simple, everyday meaning: and that meaning you may safely take without definition. It is that unequivocal relation between every American and his country which binds him to allegiance and pledges to him protection,--that goes with him wherever he goes, stamping him a traitor if he is found in the ranks of an enemy, as a criminal if violating her laws; but watching over him and covering him with the shield of her power, though he traverses the sea under a stranger flag, or sojourns on a foreign shore.​

U.S. v. Darnaud 25 F.Cas. at 762-63.

The case number is actually 14,918, too. Not 14,915.

Wrong party name; wrong case number; wrong date. An edited quote without the edit noted or the context given. Wrong citation form, too.

All good evidence we are dealing with the cut-and-paste "research" of a sovereign citizen.

 

[CaDan]

This is incorrect.

I got a statute; you got nothin'.

I win.

 

[PersephonesTear]

As much as I hate MachZer0's posts, he has a point and this is why this young woman is screwed.

This is a chicken and egg Catch-22 bureaucratic nightmare. You can't take this to court because you have no documentation <=> You can't get documentation unless you take this to court .

It sounds like her grandparents are willing to help her, and they can probably testify under oath as to her circumstances of birth. They surely have personal knowledge of the event, if her parents refuse to play ball. I think that should be enough for a court to at least hear her case, if for some reason their sworn testimony is not enough for her to file for a delayed birth certificate.

 

[Red Fox]

You don't seem to understand history very well. Most tribes in North America were nomadic with shifting, not well defined boundaries. Humans have been shifting land since the beginning of time, with one group moving into another. Europeans generally bought out or made arrangements, which tribes were not really into doing.

I know history, the real history, not the lies told by Europeans to try and justify what they did. Thank you very much.

 

[stray bullet]

.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

What are you, a 'Sovereign Citizen' ? Making up magical meanings for words and then pretending those are real is just sad and deluded.

Just because you&#8217;re ignorant of the facts doesn&#8217;t mean others must be.

And no, one cannot appropriate their terminology and remain truly free.

Mortage does indeed come from 'death' and 'pledge.' But leaving at 'mortgage = death agreement' is hilarious, delusional and foolish. The word means that the pledge ends, or dies, when either the obligation is fulfilled or the property is taken because the pledge was not fulfilled.

I&#8217;ll make this real easy for you, Aureus. Which part of God&#8217;s command, &#8220;thou shalt not borrow,&#8221; do you not understand? -- (Deu. 28:12; 15:6). Which part of the tragedies that befell those who mortgaged do you not understand? -- (Neh. chap. 5).

Romans 13:8, "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another:"

There is no love when one neglects or violates the Law of God. The definition from Bouvier's Dictionary of Law is a full disclosure that one is walking in bondage and death when engaged in mortgages and debt.

Nehemiah 5:3-5, "&#8230;We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses&#8230;We have borrowed money for the king's tribute, and that upon our lands and vineyards&#8230;and, lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, and some of our daughters are brought unto bondage already: neither is it in our power to redeem them; for other men have our lands and vineyards."

Debt brings into captivity he who engages in it.

Proverbs 22:7, "The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."

2 Kings 4:1, "Now there cried a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets unto Elisha, saying, Thy servant my husband is dead; and thou knowest that thy servant did fear the LORD: and the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be bondmen."

When one enters into debt, who is he a servant to? He is a servant to the merchants of the earth, because their law, the Law Merchant, has full jurisdiction over debt within their system. Between brothers there's not really any debt, because we give and expect nothing in return, for "it is more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20:35). But when we're dealing with the natural man and we go in debt with the world, we're entering into a private law, which is known as the lex mercatoria (Law Merchant).

The idea of paying interest on anything that is loaned to you is foreign to the Word of God, because interest (usury) is condemned by God (Exodus 22:25-27, Leviticus 25:36-37; 23:19-20, Nehemiah 5:7,10-11, Psalms 15:5, Proverbs 28:8, Isaiah 24:1-3, Ezekiel 18:8,13; 22:12-13). So, when one pays those usury fees (interest) they are partaking of the sin of the merchant who engages in the usury. Simply and directly put:

Deuteronomy 15:6; 28:12, &#8220;Thou shalt not borrow.&#8221;

[The roads] belong to the citizens.

and

Lex Mercatoria has only ever applied to international situations.

lol You&#8217;re groping in the dark again.

BTW, not &#8220;international,&#8221; but commercial i.e. commerce. Caesar regulates ALL COMMERCE.

No, it comes from the latin word residens, which means... residing.

Pleeeeze. You&#8217;ll need to dig a little deeper, deeper than your for-public-consumption Dictionary for Dummies.

&#8220;resident&#8221; means person. But, person and man are not synonymous.

The term person appears in the bible, but it is not a noun, it only describes the noun.
Matthew 22:16, "...for thou regardest not the person of men."

2 Corinthians 2:10, "...the person of Christ."

When the bible uses the term person, it is translated from a Greek or Hebrew word which means "presence or countenance", it does not mean &#8216;man.' Here is scriptural proof that "person" and "man" are not synonymous terms, for if they are synonymous, then God is a liar.

First of all, the scripture is very clear that God is no "respecter of persons" (2 Samuel 14:14, 2 Chronicles 19:7, Acts 10:34, Romans 2:11, Galatians 2:6, Ephesians 6:9, Colossians 3:25, 1 Peter 1:17). God does not respect persons, period!

Now, if the term 'person' is synonymous with 'man', then there is a contradiction in the scripture, because throughout scripture, God specifically says he does respect man! For example, "the LORD had respect unto Abel" (Genesis 4:4), God had respect "upon the children of Israel" (Exodus 2:25, Leviticus 26:9, 2 Kings 13:23), and God has "respect unto the lowly" (Psalms 138:6). Therefore, "person" and "man" are not the same.

Second of all, the scripture says that if we have respect of persons, we commit sin and transgress God's Law (Leviticus 19:15, Deuteronomy 1:17; 16:19, Proverbs 24:23; 28:21, James 2:1-4, 9). But in the same breath, Paul tells the first century believers to hold Timothy in honour (Philippians 2:29), and scripture commands us to honour all men (1 Peter 2:17)! So obviously, "persons" and "men" cannot be synonymous terms.

Let us look more closely at Leviticus 19:15. Notice it says ,"thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty." It does not say, "thou shalt not respect the poor, nor honour the mighty," but only the person of the poor and the person of the mighty. In other words, we are not to respect someone just because they are the president, or a police officer, or a banker, or a priest, or wealthy. These are the 'persons' of men. We are to respect men because of what's in their hearts, and not because of their image. Jesus did not accept the person of any (Luke 20:21), neither should we.

Another example is in James 2:1-4, where these religious people were sinning because they would give the best seats in their assembly to the persons of the rich, and not to the poor. This is discrimination. They were being partial and were giving judgment to the outward circumstances of man and not to their intrinsic merits. They preferred, as the more worthy, one whose "image" or "person" is one that is rich, high born, or powerful, over another who does not have these qualities.

Man's law is also in agreement that "person" and "man" are not synonymous parts of speech:

Person: "In law, man and person are not exactly-synonymous terms." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856, 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 137.

Person: "...not every human being is a person." Black's Law Dictionary, 4th ed. 1957 & 1968, p.1300.

"A slave is not a person." Maxim of law .

"A slave, and everything a slave has, belongs to his master." Maxim of law.

So, if you are a slave, or a bondservant of Jesus, the Christ, you don't fit that description of being the person described in the natural man's statutes. A servant belongs to his master, and our Master is the King of kings, "For ye are bought with a price" (1 Corinthians 6:20).

So, relating this back to the OP, the young woman will step into Caesar&#8217;s venue when she accepts her Caesarian-tailored persona, her &#8220;status&#8221; in Caesar&#8217;s dead world. Caesar will then legally claim his jurisdiction over his invention i.e. her.

Some may object to being called a 'slave' because they claim "slavery" was abolished in the US Constitution. This is not true. Only "involuntary servitude" was outlawed (see article XIII), not "voluntary servitude." Forced slavery was outlawed, not the freedom to choose to be an obedient bondman, or slave

After the Civil War, many slaves stayed with, and continued to serve, their masters...voluntarily. Today, citizens, persons, residents, and others of like spirit are "voluntarily serving" Caesar and his "civil" world. But the bondmen of Christ Jesus choose to be an obedient slave of and to the Prince of Peace.

In scripture, the Greek and Hebrew words that 'person' is translated from mean "to reveal the man" (i.e., presence, countenance, face, etc.), whereas in man's law, the word 'person' means "to conceal the man" (i.e., the term persona means "the mask of the actor", i.e., a fictional character that substitutes for the flesh and blood man. From this word persona we get 'person,' a fictional entity). You're the actor when you become a person, because a mask (the person) covers the true character, and you become something other than who God says you are.

In addition, it can be seen that 'person' and 'man' are not synonymous by the phrase "artificial person." In man's law, this phrase is used to describe corporations and such. But, if we replace the word 'person' with 'man,' look at what we get! "Artificial man." What is an artificial man? Is it a cyborg, a half-man/half-machine or something? However, "artificial person" makes much more sense, because a person is created by man, whereas a man is created by God. God does not create artificial things, only man does.

[As a side note, we are told that a 'noun' refers to a "person, place, or thing." Well, a 'person' is not a noun, because it is only a fiction; it does not exist; it hides the true man. However a man (or woman) is a noun. Therefore, it is more accurate to say a noun refers to "people, places, or things."]

Now, the term man is found in scripture, but it has to be qualified. You are a bondman of Christ, but not a natural man (1 Corinthians 2:14). Also, you can find the term mankind in scripture, but it refers only to the flesh (human beings), and has nothing to do with God or his Spirit.

In Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, page 823, Mankind is defined as "all human beings; the human race."

I don't have the patience to wad through Sojourner4Christ's craziness, but I remember something about some quirk in US law that does allow you to reject citizenship and declare yourself your own Sovereign Self.

No, that&#8217;s a scam. It won&#8217;t work in the long run. There&#8217;s lots of those types of scams out there for the lazy.

Saw one incident on TV, cops pulled over someone and that person refused to have their vehicle registered and pulled out some Sovereign self law stuff and paperwork and after arguing with the cop for like 20 minutes it was such a headache the cop just let them go LOL

In any case, the police power does have some discretion. In my situation, I sojourn in my vessel on the common way (translation for those of the world: &#8220;I drive my vehicle on the highway&#8221; -- no plates, license, registration, safety warrants, insurance). Use those underlined legal words of the world, and you are seen to be of the world and thus Caesar will acquire jurisdiction over you. Or, don&#8217;t use the words of the world, and Caesar cannot acquire jurisdiction. Just like the Jews who were always chasing Jesus around to capture him, they weren&#8217;t after the man, they were after his WORDS (the intended body snatching would naturally follow):

And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.... And they could not take hold of his words before the people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their peace. (Luke 20:20, 26).

This is a chicken and egg Catch-22 bureaucratic nightmare. You can't take this to court because you have no documentation <=> You can't get documentation unless you take this to court

This is also incorrect.

All that is needed is a witness to the live birth. Even a verbal witness is Lawful. But since Caesars corporation is a dead thing, he can&#8217;t relate to Lawful and so his attempts to verify require an arbitrary amount of (never-ending) paperwork in at attempt to mimic the Truth. Anyone who witnessed the live birth can sign a statement; all that is required is the date and place and name. Caesar hates that truth, and won&#8217;t tell you about it, because he&#8217;d rather have you enter into HIS contracts/instruments (passport, certificate of birth, license, ad nauseum) because use of those worldly documents INSTANTLY bring you into his jurisdiction.

 

[Aureus]

So rather than actually addressing that your etymology for the words mortgage and resident was utterly and laughably wrong you write a meaningless rant about other topics. Or as Cadan has so wonderfully shown your legal citations were wrong, incomplete and interpreted utterly wrong.

Enjoy your fantasy land until you actually run enough afoul of the government to cause them to crack down on your reprehensible illegal and immoral behaviors.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

All good evidence we are dealing with the cut-and-paste "research" of a sovereign citizen.

You can grab for labels all day long, but I&#8217;m not that thing.

I got a statute; you got nothin'.

I win.

Wrong. What you&#8217;ve &#8217;won&#8217; is bondage -- ever-increasing taxation, gov&#8217;t thugs at your door, forced vac&#8217;s, gov&#8217;t indoctrination centers for your children, and a crashing economy -- via your/Caesar&#8217;s &#8220;statutes.&#8221; Rather, Jesus Christ came to set such captives free. Stick around; you might learn something. But first, you must want to be free...

P.S. to Aureus: Further to the need for Caesar to convert you to "dead" status i.e. a thing, in order to obtain jurisdiction over the sovereign flesh-and-blood man in Christ, check Bouvier's Law Dictionary for the def's of res and resident here.

It sounds like her grandparents are willing to help her, and they can probably testify under oath as to her circumstances of birth. They surely have personal knowledge of the event, if her parents refuse to play ball. I think that should be enough for a court to at least hear her case, if for some reason their sworn testimony is not enough for her to file for a delayed birth certificate.

Back to the OP, as far as grandparents &#8220;testifying under oath,&#8221; the young woman would not even need any court hearing. She only would need the testimony (either verbal or written; Caesar prefers written in everything) of a witness to the place and date of the live birth and the name of the mother and child. (That is, in fact, what happens at a hospital birth. People present there e.g. doctors, nurses, etc. are witnesses to the live birth. So far, so good; no acquiescence to Caesar's kingdom in that. But that piece of paperwork (the record of live birth) is then sent over to the gov't's births/deaths/marriages department, where it is swapped out for a "birth certificate" -- a totally different item...)

Other than the obvious conditioning exercise aimed at the sheeple, the reason why this simple solution is not openly discussed is because such a witness&#8217;s statement on its face is not sufficient for Caesar to bring the child into his jurisdiction and monetize her, as yet unissued, birth cert. The young woman, having obtained such a witness statement, would still be a free flesh-and-blood sovereign in Christ. IOW, that type of statement is one that would not cause joinder i.e. it would not join her to the controversy and thus bring her into Caesar&#8217;s venue. So, Caesar does not want the general public to know that there are OTHER forms of &#8220;documentation&#8221; that are reluctantly accepted by Caesar, for example, to allow the woman to &#8220;drive&#8221; or to board an international flight to where ever, etc.

When my offspring were born, I had someone there with my wife and me. This man/woman signed a statement to the effect of where, when and what they saw. BTW, while a time closer to the nativity date is better, there is no time limit after the birth as to when that statement can be obtained from a witness.

I have such witness statements for each of my offspring. On that fact alone, Caesar would welcome my offspring into his kingdom at ANY TIME, now or in the future -- if I (or my offspring) submit those statements to Caesar. But we&#8217;re not going there, because we enjoy our true liberty in Christ too much.

Folks used to record family births in their Bibles -- like witness statements, completely acceptable if one wanted to subsequently become a partaker of Caesar&#8217;s benefits packages as his citizen, OR to remain sovereign in Christ.

My offspring flew on an international flight with NO IDENTIFICATION -- no passports, no I.D.&#8217;s, no birth cert&#8217;s. Again, people think that because the airlines told them they need passports, that somehow we could not possibly board that flight. That is a lie. Their own law states , as I said earlier, that there are many OTHER forms of &#8220;identification&#8221; that satisfy the requirements to board that plane. But they won&#8217;t tell you that; they only quote policy to you -- they do not quote the law. And you are expected to be the good little worker bee and not question authority; just fall in line like everyone else and bite the bullet, citizen. (Caesar&#8217;s system, as you know, operates on fear, because there is no love/God in his camp. The airlines will tell you, if pressed, that they get fined $20,000 by Immigration (a strong arm for the bankers) for every &#8220;passenger&#8217;&#8221; (legal term) they allow onto one of their int&#8217;l flights without a passport. The airlines will not quote you the law on what constitutes other &#8220;acceptable&#8221; documentation; you have to look that up for yourself, which I have done.)

So rather than actually addressing that your etymology for the words mortgage and resident was utterly and laughably wrong you write a meaningless rant about other topics. Or as Cadan has so wonderfully shown your legal citations were wrong, incomplete and interpreted utterly wrong.

It doesn't matter. Rather, what saith Scripture?

Simply and directly put:

Deuteronomy 15:6; 28:12, &#8220;Thou shalt not borrow.&#8221;

Romans 13:8, "Owe no man any thing, but to love one another:"

Nehemiah 5:3-5, "&#8230;We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses&#8230;We have borrowed money for the king's tribute, and that upon our lands and vineyards&#8230;and, lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, and some of our daughters are brought unto bondage already: neither is it in our power to redeem them; for other men have our lands and vineyards."

Debt brings into captivity he who engages in it.

Proverbs 22:7, "The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender."

2 Kings 4:1, "Now there cried a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets unto Elisha, saying, Thy servant my husband is dead; and thou knowest that thy servant did fear the LORD: and the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be bondmen."

The idea of paying interest on anything that is loaned to you is foreign to the Word of God, because interest (usury) is condemned by God (Exodus 22:25-27, Leviticus 25:36-37; 23:19-20, Nehemiah 5:7,10-11, Psalms 15:5, Proverbs 28:8, Isaiah 24:1-3, Ezekiel 18:8,13; 22:12-13). So, when one pays those usury fees (interest) they are partaking of the sin of the merchant who engages in the usury.

 

[CaDan]

When my offspring were born, I had someone there with my wife and me. This man/woman signed a statement to the effect of where, when and what they saw. BTW, while a time closer to the nativity date is better, there is no time limit after the birth as to when that statement can be obtained from a witness.

While I disagree with you about other things, this is essentially correct. As a practical matter, it can be difficult to acquire such statements later. In your case, of course, you planned ahead and have the statements ready to go if they are ever needed. In the case of the women described in the OP, it is unclear whether her parents or the midwife are willing to give such statements.

This sounds like a fun situation from a lawyer's perspective. I doubt the young lady would have a hard time finding pro bono counsel to work on it. This leads me to agree with the conclusion that this difficult situation is being exploited to take potshots at home-schoolers. Rather than complain and post dueling Youtube videos, it seems to proper thing is to just fix the problem of a lack of a birth registration and move on.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

CaDan, these forums are no different than the world at large; nothing sacrosanct here. It doesn't happen often enough in the land of the forums, but I truly appreciate your "peaceful" response.

In your case, of course, you planned ahead and have the statements ready to go if they are ever needed.

Rather than hauling live body witnesses around with us lol, their signed statements are just as powerful and yet do not grant Caesar jurisdiction.

In the case of the women described in the OP, it is unclear whether her parents or the midwife are willing to give such statements.

The midwife, if licensed by Caesar, has a list of requirements she must comply with to retain her license. (Actually, it's the same with lawyers, as both get their sheepskin from the same authority i.e. Caesar.) If people look to Caesar for the authority to do the things they do, then they will indeed render to Caesar as he determines; nothing new there. It's a shame that the mothering skills e.g. child birthing are becoming a lost art; the older women no longer mentor the younger mothers and they all pander down to Caesar's Big Pharma.

This leads me to agree with the conclusion that this difficult situation is being exploited to take potshots at home-schoolers. Rather than complain and post dueling Youtube videos, it seems to proper thing is to just fix the problem of a lack of a birth registration and move on.

A cursory search of the CEO's of the major media corp.'s will reveal Caesar's iron-fisted control over his media; his boss is the prince of the power of the air. "The News" is not the news.

This is not about a young woman's plight. It's all about the conditioning, the predictive programming, the story behind the story...

Rather than complain and post dueling Youtube videos...

As with Caesar's controlled opposition types (e.g. Alex Jones), such duels are intentional, to fuel the flames. The diaprax (rush to dialectic consensus) is all around us 24/7.

...it seems to proper thing is to just fix the problem of a lack of a birth registration and move on.

It could have been be "fixed" long ago, but Caesar does not want to reveal his soft white underbelly. But this will eventually occur, for at least two reasons: 1) Apparently, the young woman wants to partake of Caesarian benefits packages, and 2) Caesar certainly wants to monetize her as his citizen via issuance of his "certificate of birth."

In the meantime, the worldly conditioning flames continue to burn hot...

 

[Blue Wren]

This sort of thing, is one of the reasons, homeschooling is not legal, in Sweden. Every child is counted for, and entitled, to an education. I do not know, why the parents, are so petty, to not help her.

 

[Cearbhall]

The bigger point here is why should we take her word for it?

Again, that's her whole point. You would be in agreement. She realizes that no one has to believe her, and that's what's causing her trouble. She has nothing.

 

[dgiharris]

This sort of thing, is one of the reasons, homeschooling is not legal, in Sweden. Every child is counted for, and entitled, to an education. I do not know, why the parents, are so petty, to not help her.

Some people are hurtful, spiteful, selfish and just plain evil. And when these people have children, they often look at their children as nothing more than their property. And when said child has a mind of their own and do not do or say or believe as that person wants them to believe then that person will seek retribution any way they can get it.

I know many parents who will disown their children over simple beliefs. One of my white friends was disowned from her family for marrying a Mexican. Didn't matter that he was a nice and caring person, that he was getting his Masters in Engineering and would have a good job when he graduated. Nope, all that mattered was he was a dirty Mexican and how could she do that to her family....

I'd imagine something similar with this girl. She decided to break with tradition as far as her parents where concerned and so they have decided to hurt her any way they can...

 

[Cearbhall]

Rather than hauling live body witnesses around with us lol, their signed statements are just as powerful and yet do not grant Caesar jurisdiction.

The midwife, if licensed by Caesar, has a list of requirements she must comply with to retain her license. (Actually, it's the same with lawyers, as both get their sheepskin from the same authority i.e. Caesar.) If people look to Caesar for the authority to do the things they do, then they will indeed render to Caesar as he determines; nothing new there. It's a shame that the mothering skills e.g. child birthing are becoming a lost art; the older women no longer mentor the younger mothers and they all pander down to Caesar's Big Pharma.

Why on Earth do you keep comparing this to Caesar?

 

[sojourner4Christ]

This sort of thing, is one of the reasons, homeschooling is not legal, in Sweden. Every child is counted for, and entitled, to an education. I do not know, why the parents, are so petty, to not help her.

Sweden is very NWO. The spirit behind the world&#8217;s media would have you believe that homeschoolers are whacko fringe types and thus homeschooling should not be legal anywhere on the planet. That is the plan. &#8216;Give your children over to the world, and do it now. We (Caesar&#8217;s United Nations Rights of a Child) will raise him as our global citizen because, as you&#8217;ve been repeatedly told, it takes a village to raise a child.&#8217;

Again, that's her whole point. You would be in agreement. She realizes that no one has to believe her, and that's what's causing her trouble. She has nothing.

Rather, she has everything (i.e. true freedom), and that&#8217;s dangerous to the NWO. When one is running a control trip on others, he can&#8217;t have anyone walking around in the truth.

Some people are hurtful, spiteful, selfish and just plain evil. And when these people have children, they often look at their children as nothing more than their property. And when said child has a mind of their own and do not do or say or believe as that person wants them to believe then that person will seek retribution any way they can get it.

That is PRECISELY how Caesar wants you to respond to his media&#8217;s P.R. piece, i.e. &#8216;homeschooling types are hurtful, spiteful, selfish, just plain evil...treat children as property. Help us to do away with such evildoers.&#8217;

I know many parents who will disown their children over simple beliefs. One of my white friends was disowned from her family for marrying a Mexican. Didn't matter that he was a nice and caring person, that he was getting his Masters in Engineering and would have a good job when he graduated. Nope, all that mattered was he was a dirty Mexican and how could she do that to her family....

...which inflammatory anecdote has no connection whatsoever with the OP&#8217;s situation, but the intent here is that you would ignorantly make the association.

I'd imagine something similar with this girl.

Yes, many would so &#8220;imagine.&#8221; That&#8217;s their (and your?) plan.

She decided to break with tradition as far as her parents where concerned and so they have decided to hurt her any way they can..

&#8216;How dare they? those hurtful, spiteful, selfish, just plain evil parents!&#8217;

Folks, you&#8217;re being conned into buying a bill of goods.

Why on Earth do you keep comparing this to Caesar?

...because that&#8217;s who the vast majority of midwives, the lawyers, and most people reading this are working for; he issued their sheepskins. It&#8217;s an issue of authority; Caesar is their chosen authority. Caesar wrote the OP &#8220;news&#8221; article.

&#8220;Caesar&#8221; = man&#8217;s ungodly government (as opposed to God&#8217;s Lawful authority).

Meanwhile, the desired dialogue to consensus continues...

 

[Cearbhall]

...because that’s who the vast majority of midwives, the lawyers, and most people reading this are working for; he issued their sheepskins. It’s an issue of authority; Caesar is their chosen authority. Caesar wrote the OP “news” article.

“Caesar” = man’s ungodly government (as opposed to God’s Lawful authority).

Meanwhile, the desired dialogue to consensus continues...

Do you have a better alternative to official identification documents?

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Do you have a better alternative to official identification documents?

Absolutely. But to avoid hijacking this thread, I'd like to conform any responses here to the edification of the OP. Otherwise, you could easily start a separate thread re: "official identification documents."

[FYI, words are so very important! Since one's name is fundamental to "official identification documents" issues, the following could be a starting point for such a thread.

Names, in general, are given by those in authority to those in subjection to that authority, to mark and note them.

God calls his servants by name (Isaiah 43:1; 45:3; John 10:3, Revelation 2:17). Everyone&#8217;s name is sacred, it demands respect as a sign of the dignity of the one who bears it. Now, here&#8217;s a question for you, dear reader. Have you ever, in your entire life, "signed" your name in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS? Of course not! Haven&#8217;t you always used both upper and lower case letters to sign your name? Yes. And why is that? Because that is what you have been taught since a child. Because the standard Rule of Law governing the use of English Grammar states that the correct Capitalization of Proper Names must begin with a capital letter, and the rest of the name must be spelled in smaller case letters. At Law, this lets others know you are an entity created by God, and not an entity created by man.

Now, there are entities created by man. Corporations for example. Corporations are known as "persons" (i.e. persona, status, in Caesar's world) created by the government. They are created on a piece of paper and brought into existence by the government. To differentiate between those created by God and those created by the government, those created by the government have their names spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. This lets others know that this entity does not have a body, soul, and spirit like man has, but that this is a fictitious entity created for the purpose of making a profit. This is commonly known as a legal fiction. The names of ALL corporations, when registered officially with the forum State, are required to be listed in ALL CAPS.

Now, if you look, for example, at a license or credit card or any other commercial instrument, you will notice the name that appears on it is spelled in all capital letters! What this means, at law, is that the entity that is named on this license is a creature of the government, and not a creature of God. It means that entity is a servant of Caesar, and not a servant of God. In order to get a license, one must substitute one&#8217;s lawfully spelled name for a fictitiously spelled name; you must deny the name given to you by God, and accept a name given to you by Caesar in its place. Since your name is not spelled in all capital letters, the name that appears on a license is not yours! That strawman is not who you are. And you must lie and say that this name is yours to get a license.

James 2:6-7, "&#8230;Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?"

We've been warned, from the time of the Jews who, seeking to kill Jesus, pursued him using a tactic that involved taking hold of his words (the body snatching would follow as the intended consequence)...

And [the Jews] watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words so that they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor...And they could not take hold of his words before the people... (Luke 20:20, 26).

...to today when greedy men use legal fictions to monetize us...

And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you (2 Peter 2:3).

...to the end times merchants, who have been freely buying and selling the souls of men...

...the merchants of the earth...mourn over [Babylon]; for no man buyeth their merchandise anymore: the...souls of men. (Rev. 18:11, 13).]

 

[keith99]

I tend to believe it's a hoax. At the very least, it's inaccurate. They called the Texas Constitution Party "anti-government", which it most definitely is not. For goodness sake, they have "Constitution" in their name.

My wife and I have homeschooled our children for about fifteen years now and are familiar with the movement, although we're not very active in it, and I don't believe the description of homeschoolers is remotely accurate, either. I tend to believe it's a hoax to smear homeschoolers and the Constitution Party.

Personally, assuming the story is true and I was her, I'd just turn myself in and claim to be an illegal alien who snuck over the border from Mexico. That way, she'd get a social security card, a driver's license, and could go from there.

Do you also think the Democratic Peoples republic of Korea is any of those save of Korea?

Over the years I have found that those with such things prominently in their names are as often as not the opposite of what the name claims.