LDS Freedom Forum

Jefferson deleted "Subjects" and wrote in Citizens.

"Subjects."

That's what Thomas Jefferson first wrote in an early draft of the Declaration of Independence to describe the people of the 13 colonies.

http://www.independentamerican.org/2010 ... ay-it-all/

We are not subjects to Kings Presidents Rulers or Magistrates in the USA. We are not subjects to civil authority. WE ARE the Sovereignty. We ARE the law.

Jefferson aslo wrote that it was our right and DUTY to overthrow the type of government we currently have. I believe it can be done peacefully but it takes ricking liberty and even life.

Wiikwajio wrote:Jefferson deleted "Subjects" and wrote in Citizens.

"Subjects."

That's what Thomas Jefferson first wrote in an early draft of the Declaration of Independence to describe the people of the 13 colonies.

http://www.independentamerican.org/2010 ... ay-it-all/

We are not subjects to Kings Presidents Rulers or Magistrates in the USA. We are not subjects to civil authority. WE ARE the Sovereignty. We ARE the law.

Jefferson aslo wrote that it was our right and DUTY to overthrow the type of government we currently have. I believe it can be done peacefully but it takes ricking liberty and even life.

Is your proposal overthrow the government just to institute a new government that has a monopoly of force.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

"ricking" would be good.

Where did you find your definition of "citizen"? And what is your exact definition thereto?

obamohno wrote:
Is your proposal overthrow the government just to institute a new government that has a monopoly of force.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Actually it would be to restore Constitutional government and throw out the criminal servants that don't follow the law.

Noah wrote:Where did you find your definition of "citizen"? And what is your exact definition thereto?

I did not use a definition for Citizen. Jefferson used the word. What his exact meaning was would be great to know.

Just found this: http://www.answers.com/topic/citizenship

Jefferson argued that citizens were autonomous beings whose individual needs had value, and he said that governments that interfered with the fulfillment of those needs—"life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"—were tyrannical and unjust.

I like that definition.

Hello, I lurk here sometimes. If you check the 12th aof, you will see that it says that we believe in being subject to (responsible for obeying the law/ the description of a condition), not subjects to (a noun referring to people who live in a kingdom), kings, presidents, etc. Maybe this will help.

kay wrote:Hello, I lurk here sometimes. If you check the 12th aof, you will see that it says that we believe in being subject to (responsible for obeying the law/ the description of a condition), not subjects to (a noun referring to people who live in a kingdom), kings, presidents, etc. Maybe this will help.

Wow, I think you are correct. "Subject to", coupled with "in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law" --which refers to the kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates directly -- not you. I like the 12th now.

ithink wrote:

kay wrote:Hello, I lurk here sometimes. If you check the 12th aof, you will see that it says that we believe in being subject to (responsible for obeying the law/ the description of a condition), not subjects to (a noun referring to people who live in a kingdom), kings, presidents, etc. Maybe this will help.

Wow, I think you are correct. "Subject to", coupled with "in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law" --which refers to the kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates directly -- not you. I like the 12th now.

In other words, Joseph SMith gave us a parable. This way people that understood the American system and the English language could understand that we are not subjects and need not be obedient to tyrants but only to Constitutional law and laws that were not repugnant to God.

I must say I am shocked that Joseph Smith would give us parables.

I prefer Christs words (scripture) over Joseph Smiths explaining to the world about what we "mormons" believe.

And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.
And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.
I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.
Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

DnC 98:4-9

Laws are not the statutes, Codes (including the US code) or regulations of a corporation. You have to remember the US, along with all states and cities in the US are corporations, there are no De Jure governments anymore. There are only 3 laws that apply to the sovereign people of the united states according to the constitution 1)Do no harm to anyone 2) Do no harm to anyone's property 3)Be fair and true in your contracts with other sovereigns. The only thing that gives statues, codes and regulations the power of law is you.

Christ is saying here that the laws of man, which are statues, codes and regulations, are not derived from the constitution because they do not maintain the rights and privileges that support the principles of freedom. Therefore anything more or less than the constitutional law cometh of evil. The Lord maketh you free and so does constitutional law, not the corporate statues and codes that are designed to steal the fruits of your labor and put you in slavery and bondage more sorely than King Limhi and his people were.

Most members have NO idea what the 12th really says. It does not say we are subject to any and all laws the government might pass. FAR from it

http://ldsliberty.org/?p=2344 This is audio download, otherwise, I would just post the text.

Wiikwajio wrote:

ithink wrote:

kay wrote:Hello, I lurk here sometimes. If you check the 12th aof, you will see that it says that we believe in being subject to (responsible for obeying the law/ the description of a condition), not subjects to (a noun referring to people who live in a kingdom), kings, presidents, etc. Maybe this will help.

Wow, I think you are correct. "Subject to", coupled with "in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law" --which refers to the kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates directly -- not you. I like the 12th now.

In other words, Joseph SMith gave us a parable. This way people that understood the American system and the English language could understand that we are not subjects and need not be obedient to tyrants but only to Constitutional law and laws that were not repugnant to God.

I must say I am shocked that Joseph Smith would give us parables.

Perhaps not a parable by strict definition, but a meaning that is certainly lost in today's undereducated society. The corollary is that the 12th could be written thus: "We don't believe in being subjects to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, and in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law"

ithink wrote:Perhaps not a parable by strict definition, but a meaning that is certainly lost in today's undereducated society. The corollary is that the 12th could be written thus: "We don't believe in being subjects to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, and in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law"

Or, more to the way it was written.....

We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates who uphold that law of the land which is constitutional, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law which supports the principles of freedom in maintaining the rights and privileges which belong to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.