The road ahead...
We have before us an extraordinary opportunity: to finally embody the law form that is by, of, and for a free and sovereign people. - Cindy Kay Currier
A Law By and For the People
Why a new law form? First, because English Common Law (Anlgo-American Common Law) functions in violation of natural law, which is observed and oral, not written. Second, because English Common Law is developed by paid judges rather than the people. Third, because English Common Law is based on precedent (prior court decisions) rather than on the current cultural context of the case. And we could go on, but you get the idea. Probably the most important reasons, though, are that 1.) the precedent set in Britain (and thus, America) adheres to International Uniform Commercial Code (reorganized as the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods or CISG Vienna Convention) derived from Vatican Law, and 2.) law in America has been based on a misrepresented 1789 United States Constitution which operates under Commercial Law (Vatican Law), not Common Law. Seem convoluted and confusing? Yes, we think so too.
Law has always derived its legitimacy from the consent of the people. Over the past two decades, Americans have united en masse to declare themselves living inhabitants of the Continental United States, in full understanding that the land we love fraudulently operates as a British subcorporation under Commercial Law, also known as Maritime Law or the Law of the Sea (Holy See). This happened when the 1783 Treaty of Paris was signed, establishing King George III trustee over American interests on the "High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways" and thus controlling American International commerce.
America's many faces
Our founders knew what they were up against when they created America's first Constitution, the 1781 Articles of Confederation, which limited Congress and left full sovereignty with the individual states. But their ability to protect our liberties was severely challenged through the Revolutionary War, which most Americans, until recently, believed was won by the Confederation. Instead, we were set up for a knockout punch by the 1783 Treaties of Paris and Versailles.
Certain Congressional delegates interested in national banking and maintaining commercial relations with Britain raised objections to the Articles of Confederation on the grounds they 1.) did not allow Congress to collect taxes to raise money, 2.) left Congress powerless to regulate interstate commerce, 3.) did not allow Congress to raise an army, and 4.) provided no national court system to interpret laws. They launched a campaign challenging the Articles, but the case for big government was a difficult sell. In what the federalists hoped would be viewed as a compromise, they, through the pen of James Madison, drafted the Bill of Rights and offered them as the heart of a federal constitution. It was accepted and the new United States Constitution was ratified in 1789. So now America had two Constitutions, one for the land of the United States of America, as stated in the opening, "The stile of this confederacy shall be 'The UNITED STATES of AMERICA' ," and one operating under International, Maritime-Admiralty Law for commerce styled "UNITED STATES". See Cornell Law Dictionary, section 15: "UNITED STATES" means (A) a Federal corporation (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or (C) an instrumentality of the United States." (link, scroll to bottom of page). We have been subject to the law of the sea, unbeknownst to us, as 'citizens' of the UNITED STATES. Now that we know, it's time to live the law we inherited: the People's law, the Law of the Land.
Since the settlers, people of the Continental United States have always viewed the Bible as the basis of their law. In fact, the opportunity to do so is what drew many to this land in the first place. Shortly after the Gutenberg press made scriptures available to the general populace, an Augustinian monk named Martin Luther challenged the doctrine of the Catholic church. Through 95 theses, he argued that the Bible, not the Pope, was the central means by which to discern God's will and that individuals could communicate with God directly without the intermediating authority of a priest or Church. Luther's work gained popularity throughout Europe and played prominently in the forming of colonial American values.
But it appeared that even Luther, having grown accustomed to following doctrine rather than scripture, was not deprogrammed enough to discern what the Bible actually said. This is also true of Calvin, Knox, Wesley, and nearly all the Reformers. Like Luther's, their theses lean heavily on what is wrong with the religious status quo and offer very little in the way of cogent correction. But that's just as well because a free and sovereign people under natural law do not require much in writing. As the first verse in John's Gospel says (Greek translation), "In original was the saying and the saying was toward the God and God was the saying." Already we see how mistaken is the notion that the saying, often mistranslated as writing, is a book rather than a living person.
So we see that the Bible is a book, a tool for conveyance, used as the foundation for law, but it is not the word; for the expression, or 'saying,' is the word. And the 'saying' was, according to the Bible, "Let there be light" (Genesis 1:3, King James).
Important Note: Since law derives its authority from the People and a majority of the People in America say the Bible is their foundation, we will approach our discussion of law from that perspective. And since the King James version appears to be the most popular, we will draw from it in our consideration. Please note that this discussion is not one of religion, but of law.
First Day: The light (spirit) of humans
A discussion of law begins with the nature of humans which, according to Genesis 1:3-5, John 1:1-5, and Matthew 5:14, is light in two parts: light and dark (contrast). The dark was initially separated from the light (unconscious); Genesis 1:4 and John 1:5. What does this mean?
First, let's take a look at a *Greek (original language) translation of the first five verses of the Gospel of John:
"In original was the saying and the saying was toward the God and God was the saying. This was in original toward the God. All through the same became and apart from same became not yet one which has become. In same life was, and the life was the light of the humans. And the light in the darkness is appearing and the darkness it not grasped."
Now let's look at verses three through five of Genesis, the creation story (King James version):
"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
We see light being created in two different places in the first chapter of Genesis. One was the light of the humans, separated from the dark, verses 3-5. The other was the light for the firmament, verse 14-18. How do we know the first creation of light was that of humans? Because notice that God called the light Day (upper case 'D' denotes proper noun/name) and the darkness he called Night (upper case 'N' denotes proper noun/name). When God creates day and night in the firmament for seasons, days, and years, the words 'day' and 'night' are lower case (King James). Also, the first light (human spirit) is the first day (verse 5); the second light (firmament) is the fourth day (verse 19). We have confirmation of this interpretation in John's Gospel, chapter 1 verses 1-5 (Greek translation). Genesis 1:26-27 describes the creation of the human physical body, for which the spirit was already prepared. This occurred on the sixth day (verse 29).
Jesus words in Matthew 5:14 "Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid."
So we can understand the human nature as being primarily that of light; "...and God saw the light, that it was good," Genesis 1:4a
"...and the life was the light of humans," John 1:4b (Greek translation)
*English translators missed the two creations of light, the first being the light of humans, and therefore mistranslated portions of the Gospel of John. This is why we are using the Greek translation for those verses.
Why is the nature of humans so important in law?
Through the Papal Bull of 1302, the Unam Sanctam, Pope Boniface VIII asserts papal authority over the King, whose power was temporal, using the argument that the office of the Church is more spiritual and thus, divine. He bases his assertion on the idea that papal office was conferred onto Peter by Christ and then passed on to his successors. In those days, the Church had financial and moral support from the people who believed the priest could save them from hell. And so the kings had no choice but to submit. The Unam Sanctam was never effectively rebutted and stands as law today simply because the people have not rebutted it.
The Unam Sanctam provides the foundation for several other papal decrees that have resulted in the Vatican legally owning the world; yes, literally.
In June of 1452 Pope Nicholas V issued a papal bull called Dum Diversas which relegated "unbelievers" to perpetual slavery. "We grant you [Kings of Spain and Portugal] by these present documents, with our Apostolic Authority, full and free permission to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be, as well as their kingdoms, duchies, counties, principalities, and other property [...] and to reduce their persons into perpetual servitude."
In January 1455, the same Pope wrote Romanus Pontifex as a follow up to Dum Diversas allowing Catholic nations to further explore and seize lands and enslave current non-Christian inhabitants.
In May 1493 another papal bull written by Alexander VI, Inter Caetera, decreed that once a land was seized by a Christian nation, another Christian nation could not seize or establish dominion over it.
Together, the 1452, 1455, and 1493 bulls form the justification for the Doctrine of Discovery and the global slave trade. Vatican explorers were encouraged to take over indigenous lands and enslave the people. Further, the Doctrine of Discovery became a concept in International Law and was upheld in a series of United States Supreme Court decisions. According to Wikipedia, under the Discovery Doctrine, "...title to lands lay with the government whose subjects travelled to and occupied a territory whose inhabitants were not subjects of a European Christian monarch."
Then came the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 wherein the Pope declared everyone in the world dead at sea until they could prove otherwise; meanwhile, the Vatican deems itself lawful owner of all the worlds assets under the Global Estate Trust. To this day, inhabitants of the Continental United States are considered legal fictions, as represented by our all capitalized name (i.e. JOHN DOE) on Social Security cards, driver's licenses, birth certificates, utility bills, etc.
The Vatican has reorganized and now operates as the UNITED NATIONS, INC., also the parent company of UNITED STATES, INC.
So as you see, we of the United States of America absolutely MUST know who we are and assert ourselves under a constitution and form of law that reflects our status as living, conscious physical and spiritual beings, joint heirs of creation. In doing so, we will show the Vatican and Papal authority to be null and void.
Posted by someone on Facebook:
1. The IRS is not a U.S. Government Agency. It is an Agency of the IMF. (Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I., Public Law 94-564, Senate Report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391.)
2. The IMF is an Agency of the UN. (Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Ed. Pg. 816)
3. The U.S. Has not had a Treasury since 1921. (41 Stat. Ch.214 pg. 654)
4. The U.S. Treasury is now the IMF. (Presidential Documents Volume 29-No.4 pg. 113, 22 U.S.C. 285-288)
5. The United States does not have any employees because there is no longer a United States. No more reorganizations. After over 200 years of operating under bankruptcy its finally over. (Executive Order 12803) Do not personate one of the creditors or share holders or you will go to Prison.18 U.S.C. 914
6. The FCC, CIA, FBI, NASA and all of the other alphabet gangs were never part of the United States government. Even though the “US Government” held shares of stock in the various Agencies. (U.S. V. Strang , 254 US 491, Lewis v. US, 680 F.2d, 1239)
7. Social Security Numbers are issued by the UN through the IMF. The Application for a Social Security Number is the SS5 form. The Department of the Treasury (IMF) issues the SS5 not the Social Security Administration. The new SS5 forms do not state who or what publishes them, the earlier SS5 forms state that they are Department of the Treasury forms. You can get a copy of the SS5 you filled out by sending form SSA-L996 to the SS Administration. (20 CFR chapter 111, subpart B 42 2.103 (b) (2) (2) Read the cites above)
8. There are no Judicial courts in America and there has not been since 1789. Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statutes and Codes. (FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428, 1 Stat. 138-178)
9. There have not been any Judges in America since 1789. There have just been Administrators. (FRC v. GE 281 US 464, Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1Stat. 138-178)
10. According to the GATT you must have a Social Security number. House Report (103-826)
11. We have One World Government, One World Law and a One World Monetary System.
12. The UN is a One World Super Government.
13. No one on this planet has ever been free. This planet is a Slave Colony. There has always been a One World Government. It is just that now it is much better organized and has changed its name as of 1945 to the United Nations.
14. New York City is defined in the Federal Regulations as the United Nations. Rudolph Gulliani stated on C-Span that “New York City was the capital of the World” and he was correct. (20 CFR chapter 111, subpart B 422.103 (b) (2) (2)
15. Social Security is not insurance or a contract, nor is there a Trust Fund. (Helvering v. Davis 301 US 619, Steward Co. V. Davis 301 US 548.)
16. Your Social Security check comes directly from the IMF which is an Agency of the UN. (Look at it if you receive one. It should have written on the top left United States Treasury.)
17. You own no property, slaves can’t own property. Read the Deed to the property that you think is yours. The Revolutionary War was a fraud.You are listed as a Tenant. (Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st Session)
18. The most powerful court in America is not the United States Supreme Court but, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. (42 Pa.C.S.A. 502)
19. The Revolutionary War was a fraud. See (22, 23 and 24)
20. The King of England financially backed both sides of the Revolutionary The King of England financially backed both sides of the Revolutionary war. (Treaty at Versailles July 16, 1782, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80)war. (Treaty at Versailles July 16, 1782, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80)
…and as history repeats itself, Prescott Bush, father of George HW Bush and grandfather of George W. Bush, funded both sides of World War II. The Bush family have been traitors to the American citizens for decades. father of George HW Bush and grandfather of George W. Bush, funded both sides of World War II. The Bush family have been traitors to the American citizens for decades.
“Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth about what we Bushes have done to this nation, we would be chased down in the streets and lynched.”
George Bush Senior speaking in an interview with Sarah McClendon in December 1992
21. You can not use the Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a party to it. (Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Alderman of The City of Savannah 14 Georgia 438, 520)
22. America is a British Colony. (THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION, NOT A LAND MASS AND IT EXISTED BEFORE THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR AND THE BRITISH TROOPS DID NOT LEAVE UNTIL 1796.) Respublica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43, Treaty of Commerce 8 Stat 116, The Britain is owned by the Vatican.Society for Propagating the Gospel, &c. V. New Haven 8 Wheat 464, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80, IRS Publication 6209, Articles of Association October 20, 1774.)
23. Britain is owned by the Vatican. (Treaty of 1213)
24. The Pope can abolish any law in the United States. (Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol.1 A 1040 form is for tribute paid to Britain. (IRS Publication 620953-54)
25. A 1040 form is for tribute paid to Britain. (IRS Publication 6209)
26. The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. (Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493)
27. The Pope has ordered the genocide and enslavement of millions of people.(Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493)
28. The Pope’s laws are obligatory on everyone. (Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix., c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844)(Syllabus, prop 28, 29, 44)
29. We are slaves and own absolutely nothing not even what we think are our children. (Tillman v. Roberts 108 So. 62, Van Koten v. Van Koten 154 N.E. 146, Senate Document 43 & 73rd Congress 1st Session, Wynehammer v. People 13 N.Y. REP 378, 481)
30. Military Dictator George Washington divided the States (Estates) into Districts. (Messages and papers of the Presidents Vo 1, " The People" does not include you and me. pg 99. Websters 1828 dictionary for definition of Estate.)
31. ” The People” does not include you and me. (Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore. 32 U.S. 243)
32. The United States Government was not founded upon Christianity. (Treaty of Tripoli 8 Stat 154.)
33. It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the Corporation and arrest code breakers. Sapp v. Tallahasee, 348 So. 2nd. 363, Reiff v. City of Philadelphia, 477 F.Supp. 1262, Lynch v. N.C. Dept of Justice 376 S.E. 2nd. 247.
34. Everything in the “United States” is For Sale: roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, water, prisons airports etc. I wonder who bought Klamath lake. Did anyone take the time to check? (Executive Order 12803)
35. We are Human capital. (Executive Order 13037)
36. The UN has financed the operations of the United States government for over 50 years and now owns every man, women and child in America. The UN also holds all of the Land in America in Fee Simple.
37. The good news is we don’t have to fulfill “our” fictitious obligations. You can discharge a fictitious obligation with another fictitious obligation.
38. The depression and World War II were a total farce. The United States and various other companies were making loans to others all over the World during the Depression. The building of Germany’s infrastructure in the 1930’s including the Railroads was financed by the United States. That way those who call themselves “Kings,” “Prime Ministers,” and “Furor.”etc could sit back and play a game of chess using real people. Think of all of the Americans, Germans etc. who gave their lives thinking they were defending their Countries which didn’t even exist. The millions of innocent people who died for nothing. Isn’t it obvious why Switzerland is never involved in these fiascoes? That is where the “Bank of International Settlements”is located.Wars are manufactured to keep your eye off the ball. You have to have an enemy to keep the illusion of “Government” in place.
39. The “United States” did not declare Independence from Great Britian or King George.
40. The etymology of government means to control the mind. From Latinised Greek gubernatio “management, government”, from Ancient Greek κυβερνισμός, κυβέρνησις (kybernismos, kybernesis) “steering, pilotage, guiding”, from κυβερνάω (kybernao) “to steer, to drive, to guide, to act as a pilot” plus Latin mente “mind”.
What Rules the Tree Rules Me
American Law of the Land is the People's law. And the People's law aligns with the laws of creation as, God (Prime Source) intended. We call this Natural Law.
The practice of natural law has been the norm for tribal communities in America and across the world, but colonial rule (Vatican Law) has made living as nature intended nearly impossible. So now we find ourselves in a transitional phase, going "back to nature" as it were.
Natural law is perceived at the most basic level of life; sometimes unconsciously for those of us in transition. It is what informs and guides our awareness of self, others, and all living systems. The boundaries of Natural Law, or limits to our freedom, come from honoring the freedom of others. So fear of anarchy is unfounded because Natural Law, based on natural law, forms its own structure. There is no need for artificial man-made boundaries, although specific communities will likely adopt some.
With Natural Law, necessity for fictions such as money, government, and external authority fall away as we come to understand the tapestry of creation we are "sewn" into. There is more than enough support for abundant life and wholeness in the relationship of all things. We miss this when we look outside ourselves for validation. Being inwardly guided, we meet one another at the center of ALL and each come away understanding our unique contributions to humanity and the universe.
Natural Law helps create the space in our minds to allow what is, to be. We are unaccustomed to being still. We don't yet quite understand the excitement of calm, the everything in nothing. We were programmed to a state of perpetual desire, anxiety, and labor. Now for deprogramming; realigning with deep, abiding peace and joy.
The Practice of Natural Law
The practice of Natural Law is not necessarily natural, but is appropriate in this moment because we are in process; healing and learning who we are in relation to all others. We are in a correction period; a time of purging the old, making room for the new. There are conflicts to resolve and disputes to settle. So, how does one practice Natural Law?
Each living system is an expert at natural law from inception. We automatically operate according to the flow of nature whether we realize it or not. Little children innately understand that for every action there is a consequence and that we thrive when allowed to function freely within natural structures. We intuitively know that our energy is highest when we operate in harmony. It feels better to be in joy than in anxiety. It's easier to live in truth than in falsehood. Living the laws of nature is living unobstructed energy; because that's how we thrive. So we will say, the practice of Natural Law is the maintenance of clean, unobstructed human energy; wholeness.
Introducing Natural Law Procedure
Again, there's nothing natural about writing natural law procedure; but its necessary for now and so we will do our best.
Navigating transition usually requires maintaining some of the "old" while introducing the "new." We will do this by utilizing terms that are familiar such as jury, grand jury, court, crime, charge, indictment, etc. Please refer to the Glossary page for definitions.
What is offered on this site is strictly potential, not precedent. In other words, what has always been done in the past has little bearing on what is done now or in the future. Additionally, in Natural Law, rulings and judgements are made in present time according to contemporary circumstances by individuals using now-time discernment. In Common Law, determinations are made according to precedent or past rulings by prior judges. It is opposite in Natural Law. Of course we will continue learning from the past and utilizing time-honored wisdom; but at the same time, jurors and judges are free to make their own determinations and not bound by the actions of past jurors and judges.
Sample Case: Heirs of Creation Versus U.S. Corporation
We thought it would be most helpful to examine an actual case that was heard by a Natural Law Grand Jury and subsequently by a criminal court Natural Law Judge and Jury. We will start with the inception of the case of Heirs of Creation Versus U.S. Corporation.
Inception. Someone, having found a preponderance of evidence, initiated a criminal case against the United States Corporation. This person, from this point on, will be called the prosecutor. Having found the traditional law systems in America to be fraudulent and dishonorable, the prosecutor elected to try the case under Natural Law rather than English-Roman forms of law (Common Law or Constitutional Law).
Step One. The prosecutor decided to loosely follow American federal guidelines in order to reduce the chance of the case being disputed and for familiarity (to aid the American people in understanding the proceedings). First, she called on a grand jury to investigate and determine whether a crime had been committed. Grand jury members were individuals living in the land commonly known as North America. (Note: this particular grand jury was assembled for the express purpose of hearing such cases prior to the case being brought. This particular grand jury chose to dissemble immediately after the case was heard and presentment submitted.)
The Grand Jury clerk facilitated all communication and coordination before, during, and after the hearing.
Step Two. A modality for the hearing was chosen. This Grand Jury preferred to hear the case via telephone conferencing; the prosecutor agreed.
Step Three. A hearing time and date was agreed upon for July 13, 2014.
Step Four: The prosecutor assembled evidence and posted it on the Internet for transparency and to facilitate any private investigations by anyone wishing to follow the case, particularly Grand Jury members.
Step Five: The Grand Jury was assembled and roll was called. 28 Grand Jurors appeared for the hearing. This particular Grand Jury had previously "sworn" to perform their duties honorably; however, the practice of Natural Law does not recognize any such "swearing in" process. A natural person's yes means yes and no means no.
Step Six: The prosecutor presented evidence. Grand Jury members were allowed to ask questions and clarify any areas of uncertainty. The hearing itself lasted approximately 45 minutes; evidence had been posted for examination in advance.
Step Seven: The Grand Jury foreman took a vote (in roll-call fashion) for "true bill" or "no true bill" which simply meant either "yes, there's enough evidence to indict" or "no, there's not enough evidence to indict." The 28 member Grand Jury voted unanimously to indict.
Step Eight. The Grand Jury foremen wrote up a presentment which was posted publicly and also sent via certified email to the World Court and to the Pentagon (USA). The Grand Jury clerk and foreman also requested immediate enforcement based on the seriousness of the findings.
Step Nine. A judge was selected by the prosecutor and called to hear the criminal case according to Natural Law. A Natural Law criminal court clerk was called by the prosecutor and requested to assemble a trial jury. The clerk facilitated all communication and coordination before, during, and after the hearing.
Step Ten. A modality for the trial was chosen. The court elected to hear the case via telephone conferencing; the prosecutor agreed.
Step Eleven. A trial time and date was agreed upon for August 25, 2014.
Step Twelve. A summons was send via certified email to the defendant by the prosecutor, along with an offer to participate in jury selection. The website where charges and evidence could be reviewed was also provided. Confirmation that the summons arrived to the intended recipient was received by the prosecutor.
Step Thirteen. Additional evidence was assembled and posted on the Internet for public view and investigation.
Step Fourteen. At the time of the trial, all parties were assembled and roll was called. 13 jurors participated the trial. The jury verbally agreed to perform their duties honorably as the practice of Natural Law does not recognize any "swearing in" process. A natural person's yes means yes and no means no.
Step Fifteen. The defendant elected not to respond to the summons and did not appear for the hearing. Evidence was presented and the jury deliberated anyway. The hearing itself lasted approximately 45 minutes; all evidence had been posted for examination in advance.
Step Sixteen. The prosecutor, addressing the Judge, presented a request for remedy.
Step Seventeen. The jury foreman took a roll-call vote of "guilty" or "not guilty." The jury returned a unanimous guilty verdict.
Step Eighteen. The jury requested to vote for the remedy and were allowed. The jury voted 12 to 1 to accept the requested remedy with a couple of minor adjustments. The final decision, of course, would be left to the Judge.
Step Nineteen. After the evidence and remedy were presented, an additional potential juror, who through extenuating circumstances was unable to make the trial on time, called in and requested to register their "guilty" vote as she had heard the evidence. The vote was accepted by the Judge and agreed upon by the prosecutor. This made a 14 member jury unanimous vote.
Step Twenty. The Judge deliberated and returned an acceptance of the verdict and remedy as adjusted by the jury.
Sample Case Discussion
For the sake of simplicity, we will manage this section by addressing questions asked about the case.
Question: From where does the Natural Law Grand Jury, Court, or Judge derive their authority?
Answer: Authority is an interesting concept in Natural Law since the only authority anyone possesses is over oneself. We believe what is meant by this question, however, is how does the court gain compliance with its decisions?
Compliance with a court decision under Natural Law just makes sense. Belonging to a Natural Law based social system is a free-will choice thing; so why would anyone affiliate themselves with a system they had no intention of complying with? If one does not wish to comply with natural law, they exit the Natural Law based system. If the time comes when all of Earth operates according to Natural Law, then belonging with the human living systems of Earth will depend on compliance. This might be a good time to reiterate the Maxims of Love.
Maxims of Love:
The law of freedom - All living systems have the right to be free.
The law of protection - All living systems have a right to be protected from the harmful actions of others.
The law of balance - All living systems unable or unwilling to live and act in accordance with the maxims of love will be given the opportunity to either correct their behavior or accept the consequences.
The law of intervention - The community has the right to intervene in all situations where the maxims of love are violated regardless of local laws, customs, ethics, or practices.
Question: I don't think you understand what I mean. Let me rephrase the question. Common Law Grand Juries derive their authority from the Magna Carta and Bill of Rights. What can you show as a basis for your actions?
Answer: Natural Law is mostly oral and based in now-time. No written or historic document could possibly provide any sort of "authority" over a free and sovereign human living system. The basis for any action in nature is simply, I am.
Question: In the case of Heirs of Creation Versus U.S. Corporation, how did you handle the issue of jurisdiction? Were all of the jurors Americans?
Answer: The Grand Jury investigation showed that the U.S. Corporation committed crimes against humanity. So while the Grand Jury was composed of North Americans, the criminal trial included one or two international jurors. But again, the concept of "authority" coming from a geographical location makes little sense to us. With Natural Law, both parties select the judge and jury members by agreement. If they want someone from across the pond, then so be it. It's their case.
Question: What are the qualifications of the prosecutor and judge in this case?
Answer: The prosecutor and judge both saw that the people of Earth were being enslaved and tortured. The prosecutor believed she could prove it and created a forum in which to do so. The judge agreed to oversee the proceedings.
Question: What I mean is, are they attorneys?
Question: Then what makes them think anyone will take them seriously?
Answer: If you look at the case you will see the nature of the work attorneys do in the U.S. Corporation. That speaks for itself. Natural Law provides for no such construct as a career or "profession" in law.
Question: So according to you, anyone could be a prosecutor and anyone could be a judge. That sounds dangerous. A bunch of gang-bangers could get together and convict anybody of anything!
Answer: Remember, there must be disputants. Both parties agree on the judge and jury. If they choose a bunch of gang-bangers, as you say, what is that to anyone else?
Question: It just sounds to me like things could get out of control real quick.
Answer: Then let's play it out. The gang-bangers make a decision and the disputants live with it. What's the worst that can happen?
Question: The gang-bangers might decide to do something like torture the defendant or order some ungodly punishment.
Answer: There is no punishment in Natural Law; only restitution and restoration. But if the disputants chose poorly and were harmed by their judge and jury, they would have a right to protection. The community would intervene if necessary. And the gang-bangers might never be asked to hear a case again.
Question: I see. Okay, so if I wanted to take my bank to court for foreclosing on my house, I could gather my friends together, pick one of them to be Judge and hold a trial. What good would that do?
Answer: Not much. Because you are saying you want to hold the trial by Natural Law while you live by Common Law.
Question: Explain please.
Answer: By Natural Law, if you want to have a bank, you select a trustee to manage your value for you while you learn to manage it yourself. If you select a trustee who proves to be inept, you de-select them and select another. You are responsible for your selection. It appears you have chosen to deal with corporate banks who view you as trustee of their value. You can't have it both ways; you either recognize yourself as a direct heir of creation or you don't; you either live by the laws of nature or you don't. (It might be helpful to review the "Structure" page of this site.)
Question: That seems extreme. We are in a time of transition, you know.
Answer: Yes, true. So we would suggest navigating the changes as guided by your highest wisdom.
Question: How are you going to convince people to adopt this new way, Natural Law?
Answer: Once artificial constraints are released and the people come to understand who they are, they will automatically behave in ways that feel natural. We are simply here to welcome the people, not convince them.
Question: I know a lot of people who like the way things are now. Their free-will choice would be for government to stay the way it is for the most part. What about them?
Answer: Freedom is for everyone, not just a few. If you want to be governed and can find people to govern you, so be it. However, those who would govern themselves are free to do so as well.
Restitution and Restoration
When one experiences harm or loss at the hands of another, whether deliberate or accidental, that one is to be completely restored to whatever extent possible, and then some. It is the offender's responsibility to make restitution. If the offender lacks the resources or is otherwise unable to provide restoration, the responsibility for restitution falls to the offender's clan, band, or tribe.
If harm was committed due to an illness, condition, or incapacity on the part of the offender, the offender should seek restoration to prevent such an act from reoccurring. An example might be a case of persistent drunk driving, consistent irresponsible use of mind altering substances, or a seizure disorder.
Formal punishment is senseless as it, alone, provides no restoration to either party and is shown to lack efficacy as a deterrent to harmful behavior. In nature, all polarizations move toward reconciliation. Formal punishment artificially interferes with this process. Natural consequences and societal pressure to conform to life-giving behaviors provide their own deterrents. It might be helpful to mention the Maxims of Love's law of balance: All living systems unable or unwilling to live and act in accordance with the maxims of love will be given the opportunity to either correct their behavior or accept the consequences.
Who decides what is appropriate restitution? Both parties involved may select a judge and / or jury to investigate and make a decision. If a hearing has already be conducted, the judge may determine what is appropriate at the conclusion of the hearing. A special hearing may be conducted depending upon the wishes of those involved.
The fourth Maxim of Love deals with the law of intervention: The community has the right to intervene in all situations where the maxims of love are violated regardless of local laws, customs, ethics, or practices. So what form does this intervention take?
An offhanded answer might be, the least of whatever is required.
In this time of transition, humanity calls for some healing in this area. Enforcement has gotten out of control and the concept may carry negative energy with it now. But in this moment especially, it is our obligation to peacefully protect each other, Earth Mother, and all her gifts.