Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,538 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 838,905
Pageviews Today: 1,001,252Threads Today: 227Posts Today: 3,341
07:57 AM

Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
Message Subject Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
"Was the birth (actually a nativity) recorded in any public arena/record? Was a midwife there? Was the event recorded in a family record (like a bible) with a witness?

It really is not relevant if the man or woman uses Federal Reserve Money (or accepts any benefit from the Government) as each of them are a contractual agreement and subjugation.

Actually, none of that is relevant. We're not under
'maritime law' nor does any court recognize maritime law as the basis of all US laws. The font on a birth certificate is meaningless. Those are all just made up contrivances of 'sovereign citizens' citing themselves. None of them have any relevance to the actual law.

Whether or not a birth is witness in a 'family record' like a bible is irrelevant. And the use of federal reserve notes by anyone is completely irrelevant to the application of birth certificates, as dollars don't form a 'contractual agreement'. That's just more pseudo-legal nonsense.

There's really not a single part of this that you got right.
 Quoting: J 34311994

12 USC 411:

"Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank."

cited directly from: [link to www.law.cornell.edu]

Tell us again how it is not law?

CAPITIS DIMINUTIO: In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality. Tills was a loss or curtailment of a manís status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications, following upon certain changes in his civil condition. It was of three kinds, enumerated as follows: Capitis diminutio maxima. The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a manís condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights. Capitis diminutio media. A lesser or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man lost his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights. Capitis diminutio minima. Tile lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a manís family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potcstas. It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 1G, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom. Law,

Cited directly from: [link to thelawdictionary.org]

There you go. Official cites from official sources, YOU are the one not citing a damn word you posted.

I guess you are some sort of god that can tell people what is law and what is not? Cite YOUR sources for you post, peon.
Please verify you're human:

Reason for copyright violation: