dawn, health care becomes the responsibility of the government when it rejects the secular "laws of nature and of nature's God" and implements "legal positivism's" philosophies mingled with religion.

Dave, how would you explain or define "the chains of the Constitution"?

Waffler, lololol / hahahaha, a fairly accurate observation. The more despotic totalitarianism, tyranny, enslavement, etc. you pay for, the more you get (loosing inalienable rights, liberty at nature's law, etc.). Paying orchestral gods for their song of usurpation does conclude with; "You get what you pay for !"

In context, the quote has some merit. In a broad (out of context) rating, it would be a definite thumbs down. For those that regard all taxes to be equal — you are the problem. The enslavement of the second plank of the communist manifesto is not the same as non-personal duties, imposts and excises.

🥳

William, an FYI correction; your giant leap concerning legal persons is incorrect. Corporations, LLCs, etc. are owned by government(s). Corporations are administered through allowed parties and associations along with varying conditions subject to their owner's codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, statutes, etc.

I'm not so sure it is "old and out of date" as much a lying subterfuge on its face. The accountant above mentioned (now passed) went to prison for doing exactly what the cloaked in the black rob high priest of the dark priesthood stated. The primary argument against the accountant was that he was stealing from the government because without his expertise, his clients wouldn't know all the right-offs. None of his right-offs or returns were altered by the IRS (stood as filed).

Jim, spoken like a stupid slave that enjoys his position and some one that believes what his godly masters tell him. I've done extensive research on the 16th Amendment for court presentation and found the Amendment was never legally ratified. That case made it to court, was called out on recess and never resumed (over 40 years ago). If the 16th Amendment were legally ratified, it would eliminate the de jure State united as a "republican form of government", a government of laws and any semblance of actual inalienable rights and liberty.  AND, by "constitutional", did you mean by "the laws of nature and of nature's God" (Declaration of Independence); OR, did you mean religious canons by the illegitimate occupying statist theocracy infesting this land?

Terry, how do you define "Christian Based Republic"? Is your definition based in religion? Mine wasn't ! ! !  A "Republic" is a secular expression. Your ignorance is so pervasive it flows through a membrane of truth totally unrecognized. In a Christian Based Republic is: each and every individual is recognized as a noble sovereign — son/daughter of Eternity's King (at nature's law, no one being greater or lesser than another). The 2nd plank of the communist manifesto is a religious canon that makes each sovereign a slave to carnal god's deadly power to harm.

When under any system of government, where a man (woman) does not own his own labors (or the fruits thereof) there is slavery. When the once noble heirs to the Eternal King are consider mere chattel / property to be dealt with as carnal gods please (at law makers' whim), individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty at nature's law are more than just lost — they are not recognized. Helots, serfs and otherwise dupes rationalize their captivity choosing a deluded status beneath their regal status, genuflecting within their internment of fleshly gods.

NO !  that is not apropos!  Religions such as socialism live as long as other people's money holds out. Religion, not nature's law, is recognized by its feeding the hungry, healing the sick, clothing the naked, financing the indigent, housing the homeless, etc. The de jure States united was to be a secular republican form of government — creating codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, statutes, etc. (from law that already existed naturally) that organized advancement and protection of individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty at nature's law. The current occupying statist theocracy infesting this land creates religious canons (not elements of nature's law) expanding it "establishment of religion" contrary to nature's law.

Waffler, I for one (and I know others) qualify for not sharing in plunder. My story once again, when I was so poor my young family did not have as much as a vehicle to sleep in and was going hungry. I did NOT (nor did my family) indulge ourselves in the occupying statist theocracy's plunder.

The "A" from Reston; are you saying rich people don't bathe or what is your definition of rich that would make someone on your list / definition filthy?

🤣🥳

Sillik, hahahaha, lolololol you are a prime example of one that Harriet Tubman would free from slavery if you but knew (knows) what slavery is. Your avowed socialism is a supreme example of slavery. Your religious dogma of controlled group think is antithetical to individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty at nature’s law.

Bryan, maybe? Your comment is absolutely UNknowable under current conditions. The occupying statist theocracy infesting this land has so sufficiently replaced knowledge of nature's law / natural law / common law / inalienable rights / liberty / a "republican form of government" — with — their own religious dogmas, that the majority of voters are without rain, thunder and lightning to vote on.

It is NOT ! ! ! the duty of the unelected / unconstitutional monopoly / anti-nature's law / anti-unalienable rights & liberty / ultimate determinants of what is law - bar/gods to be: thought police, nor those who have power to prevent or suppress ANYTHING.

I liked Tupper Saucy, he was a good man

I have posted this multiple times. Early in my marriage, circumstances exposed that I had not as much as a vehicle for my young family to sleep in. We went hungry but would not take government assistance. I absolutely concur, it is; "Better to starve free than be a fat slave."

Sillik, socialist dogma within their lying religion promotes slavery and eventually, all but a few starve.

cal, are you aware that slaves in the Old Testament was a policy denied by god but taken on by man, complete with using the rules of the surrounding societies.

And the Democrat party also.

Government's replacement of bravery with fear is partly couched in the concept of safety and security. Tyrannous malefactors spew their religious dogma that it is a primary responsibility of government (carnal god's priesthood) to keep their serfs and slaves safe and secure. Hellen Keller said: “Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.” (Helen Keller). Safety is uniquely an element of Admiralty law, not the "law of nature" (Declaration of Independence) or the "Lord's perfect law of liberty". When politicians or others within positions of authority and power present safety or security of people as the moral and legal basis for their usurpations, they do so by an elevation of Admiralty law over common law, nature's law and law of the land. John Locke (second to the bible quoted source for the Constitution) claimed government's duty was to protect "rights" of the people, not the people themselves (a government of law vs a government of men)

Archer 😁 I've ask GBT differing questions on the subject and then after a few communications in logic and religion back and forth, GBT came to my same conclusion; BUTTT !  when I had someone else on a different computer ask the same questions, GBT continued to give its original prejudice. GBT would only give my specific answer back when it knew it was me.  I'm sort of a half hearted fan of AI. It is a good tool when used appropriately. After retirement, I contine to work with attorneys across the country. I've used everything from the most expensive SpellBook to GBT and, I've not found one excerpt from AI that didn't need to be corrected and added to.

David, define religion. Marx used the addictive tenets of religion to organize his version of socialism.