|
Post by joechristopherson on Nov 11, 2006 8:35:20 GMT -5
Go to Google Video and wtach from Freedom To Fascism. Eye opening. Joe
|
|
|
Post by eric on Nov 18, 2006 23:24:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by darcfollowingjesus on Nov 24, 2006 22:26:01 GMT -5
I just watched this video and it needs to be watched by every American that is truly an American! If everyone hasn't watched this then I would say unplug yourself from the system long enough to click on the link and treat yourself to a little bit of some truth. If you don't watch, I question why and then if you do watch it and it doesn't make your blood boil then you're too far gone already!!!!
At the same time we need to be careful because we shouldn't let anything distract us from preaching the Gospel of Jesus and doing our duty as citizens of Heaven first which is to witness, witness and witness about Jesus some more! The world around us IS going to hell!!! We know we are headed for a one world system the Bible tells us this and there is NO STOPPING IT!! It's good to be informed but maintain your walk before the Lord staying busy about the work of our Lord's kingdom. Amen.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 24, 2006 22:47:12 GMT -5
It certainly is entertaining.
|
|
|
Post by oap001 on Nov 24, 2006 23:40:49 GMT -5
Your right Darc....God bless....
|
|
|
Post by michaelsei on Nov 25, 2006 1:16:41 GMT -5
I've seen it...I posted a blog about the documentary... www.myspace.com/michaelseiThese issues are finally garnering national attention...The Remnant have been saying these things for years...But hopefully it will cause more people to not blindly accept the 'religion' of statism.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 25, 2006 12:47:33 GMT -5
I know that numerous things were covered in the documentary, but it seemed that the main focus was that income tax was illegal. Do you agree with this and why?
|
|
|
Post by michaelsei on Nov 25, 2006 13:40:58 GMT -5
I know that numerous things were covered in the documentary, but it seemed that the main focus was that income tax was illegal. Do you agree with this and why? See retraction below...Income tax is legal, just not the best economics.
|
|
|
Post by tonyholland on Nov 25, 2006 22:49:57 GMT -5
Sorry, I certainly don't have the time, nor do I tend to utilize other people's video's or articles in talking about these issues. I assume that if you feel strongly enough about these issues, you have done independent research and have your own position.
But to your comment.
Ok, we start with that.
US Constitution--Amendment XVI The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Is there a law saying we must pay taxes?
Read United States Code Title 26. This is the federal law the covers payment of taxes.
This will at least get us started.
|
|
|
Post by michaelsei on Nov 26, 2006 14:14:30 GMT -5
I must humbly retract...I never did my own research and was told when I was younger/still living at home that the Federal Income Tax is illegal and have assumed that ever since. I have jumped on the bandwagon...But I'm jumping off before the wagon goes careening off a cliff. I am correctable:) I hope this assures you that we can have civil intellectual debates based on truth and the pursuit of truth. Now, that being said. I will say that I don't like the Federal Income Tax and that there are better ways... 58. Is the Federal Income Tax Constitutional? Yes. The Sixteenth Amendment was adopted according to the requirements of the constitution. 59. Is this the type of tax which the Founding Fathers would have employed? No. They provided that direct taxes be apportioned to the states according to population, not according to the incomes of the people. 60. Has income tax been administered uniformly? No. A graduated income tax violates the equal protection of rights. It violates the principle of uniformity required by the Constitution and makes the property of accumulated wealth less sacred than those who have less. 61. Is it possible to administer the Income Tax fairly? No. This could only be done by setting up a universal monitoring system similar to a "police state." This would violate all of the basic rights guaranteed in the Fourth Amendment. 62. Would it ever be possible to repeal the Federal Income Tax? Yes. By phasing out governmental activities which are clearly outside the Constitution, the cost of government would be greatly reduced and the income tax could be safely eliminated. 63. Would the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment interfere with defense and other legitimate Federal responsibilities? No.Tariffs and other sources of Federal revenue would more than adequately provide for the legitimate expenses of the Federal Government if its unconstitutional expenses were phased out. Who knows, there might even be a surplus! 64. Is a national sales tax constitutional? Yes, according to Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, the federal government may assess a sales (excise) tax as long as it is uniform throughout the United States. www.nccs.net/101questions.html
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 26, 2006 17:59:08 GMT -5
61: That's like arguing that murder being illegal is unreasonable because without a national monitoring system it can never be applied completely fairly, and some murderers may get away.
62: Which governmental activities do you find to be unconstitutional?
63: Related...what do you take to be the legitimate expenses of the US Government?
|
|
|
Post by michaelsei on Nov 27, 2006 3:29:38 GMT -5
61: That's like arguing that murder being illegal is unreasonable because without a national monitoring system it can never be applied completely fairly, and some murderers may get away. First, the Income Tax is not illegal and what can't be applied fairly?; you didn't state what the application is. You should rewrite the question including what the word "it" is reflecting back on. If you break the sentence into its component parts, the "it" is referring to murder or a national monitoring system. That would be an absurd statement:)lol For my sake, try to elaborate when using analogous language, it really helps to disseminate an idea/argument. 62: Which governmental activities do you find to be unconstitutional? Judicial Legislation. 63: Related...what do you take to be the legitimate expenses of the US Government? Uphold God's moral law=punish evildoers Protect its citizens 1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; 14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. 6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
|
|
|
Post by mahatma on Nov 27, 2006 12:35:42 GMT -5
Ok, I will try this again. 61 is arguing that the government applying/enforcing income tax law should be illegal because, without a national monitoring system, income tax law cannot be applied fairly and universally. Since a national monitoring system would be, by this argument, a violation of 4th Amendment rights, income tax law is unreasonable and unfair.
That is like arguing that the government applying/enforcgin murder law should be illegal because, without a national monitoring system, laws against murder cannot be applied fairly and universally. Since a national monitoring system would be, by this argument, a violation of 4th Amendment rights, murder law is unreasonable and unfair.
Is that more clear?
In response to 62: what do you define as judicial legislation? Part of the defined job of the courts is to interpret law and create precedent. It's not possible for courts to do their jobs without interpreting the national and state constitutions, and without interpreting legislation.
On 63 (upholding God's law): since you seem to be concerned with constitutionality, could you show me where in the constitution of the US it states that we are to uphold God's law, rather than the law of the land? So far as I know, we have freedom of religion here in the US which is supposed to guarantee us freedom from law based on a specific religion. Scripture cannot be applied to US law as it has no place within the constitutional framework.
As far as "Protect its citizens" could you point me to the specific law that has been developed which you feel does not protect the citizens of the country? (I feel that there really is some such law, but I would be interested to see which portions of legislation and judicial precedent you feel is not protective of the citizenry)
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Nov 27, 2006 16:44:55 GMT -5
I have watched the video and if it is true, then there is definitely something wrong with this country...more than I thought there was! I haven't checked into this more myself or looked into the "other side of the story," but this seems pretty crazy!
|
|