|
HR 1691 RH
Articles on
Religious freedom and the land
HR 1691 RH To Protect Religious Liberty [NOT!!!!!]
Ye stand upon your sword, ye work abomination, and ye defile
every one his neighbour's wife: and shall ye possess the
land? (Ezekiel 33:26)
The examination of this bill before congress has been done for
several reasons.
1. That you may see the nature and mind set of the leaders of
the United States government.
2. Is so that you will see the direction the people of America
are taking as the apostate Church and Government confuse and
deprive the people of the nature of the Church.
3. Is to bring your attention to the devious adversaries of
freedom and faith working cleverly behind the seen. Take heed to thyself, lest thou make a covenant with the
inhabitants of the land whither thou goest, lest it be for a
snare in the midst of thee: (Exodus 34, 12.)
You should understand that the LORD God gave man this planet
upon which to live and to exercise dominion over.
You should understand that Jesus the Christ saved us from the
sin of making other men gods over us.
You should understand that we have been deceived and have
returned to the mire and gone under the authority of others.
...and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou
goest to possess it....and there thou shalt serve other gods,..
shalt thou find no ease...shalt have none assurance of thy
life: (Deuteronomy 28:63, 66)
There are ways out of this subjective dominion of the State but
the door is closing as the grip of the world order closes about
us.
"The first farmer was the first man, and all historic
nobility rests on possession and use of land." 1
You should understand the difference between a 501c3 church and
the 508 Church, a.k.a. The ekklesia and the Body of Christ. see: The Body
of Christ Vs. The Body of the State
Also, you should desire to know the importance of possession of
the land.
; "For as labor cannot produce without the use of land, the
denial of the equal right to the use of land is necessarily the
denial of the right of labor to its own produce."2
The `Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999', HR 1691 RH
Union Calendar No. 125 106th CONGRESS 1st Session
[Report No. 106-219] is not a BILL To protect religious liberty.
It is an attempt to end all liberty throughout the land.
It states in, "SEC. 2. (b).. A government may substantially
burden a person's religious exercise if the government
demonstrates that application of the burden to the person--
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling
governmental interest."
Government is establishing its interest above the Church, making
the Church subservient to its will instead of God's will.
Section 2 (c) centralizes the power of the "Attorney General or
the United States or any agency, officer, or employee thereof
under other law, including section 4(d) of this Act, to
institute or intervene in any action or proceeding."
Section. 3.(a) States that someone whose freedom of religion is
violated, "shall bear the burden of persuasion on whether the
challenged government practice, law, or regulation burdens or
substantially burdens the claimant's exercise of religion." In
other words you will have to prove to a judge that your
religious rights are "substantially" burdened. Your right has
become a privilege at the permission of a judge.
(b) LAND USE REGULATION-
In the same section (1) (A), concerning land, "a government has
the authority to make individualized assessments of the proposed
uses to which real property would be put," and again puts the
"governmental interest" above religious rights.
Paragraphs (1) of section 3 reduces "religious assemblies or
institutions" to an equal status "with nonreligious assemblies
or institutions" like McDonald's and the corner gas station.
In "SEC. 5. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION". Paragraph "(e) GOVERNMENTAL
DISCRETION IN ALLEVIATING BURDENS ON RELIGIOUS EXERCISE- A
government may avoid the preemptive force of any provision of
this Act by changing the policy that results in the substantial
burden on religious exercise, by retaining the policy and
exempting the burdened religious exercise, by providing
exemptions from the policy for applications that substantially
burden religious exercise, or by any other means that eliminates
the substantial burden." With such "discretion" the government
may burden one religious belief and establish another by policy
manipulation in opposition to the second amendment.
And paragraph, referring to the Constitution, (g) says the "Act
should be construed in favor of a broad protection of religious
exercise" but it does not say "shall".
In SEC. 7. of the AMENDMENTS TO RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION
ACT.
The definitions, deletions and insertions in the Religious
Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb-2) amends and
expand the agencies that can "substantially burden a person's
religious exercise".
We see a significant change in the Religious Freedom
Restoration Act of 1993. Paragraph (3) of Section 7 of the
`Religious Liberty Protection Act of 1999' redefines "exercise
of religion" by altering paragraph (4) Section 5 of The 1993
RFRA. It states, "by striking all after `means,' and inserting
`any exercise of religion, whether or not compelled by, or
central to, a system of religious belief, and includes (A) the
use, building, or conversion of real property by a person or
entity intending that property for religious exercise; and (B)
any conduct protected as exercise of religion under the first
amendment to the Constitution.'"
This phrase alone undermines all liberty and freedom left in
this land. It is so cleverly devious that I can not believe that
it is included for anything but the most malevolent of purposes
and is no accident legal jargon.
The same phrase is also included again in "SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act--
(1) the term `religious exercise' means any exercise of
religion, whether or not compelled by, or central to, a system
of religious belief, and includes (A) the use, building, or
conversion of real property by a person or entity intending that
property for religious exercise; and (B) any conduct protected
as exercise of religion under the first amendment to the
Constitution;"
The use of the words like use and conversion seem to be
unimportant but they are key to the infammy of this bill. We
will examine why below.
This same section in Paragraph (2) goes on to include the
religious Church under the infamous privilege of the 14th
Amendment, relegating a mandatory and separate body and right to
a subjective and controlled relationship.
(2) the term `Free Exercise Clause' means that portion of the
first amendment to the Constitution that proscribes laws
prohibiting the free exercise of religion and includes the
application of that proscription under the 14th amendment to the
Constitution;
And paragraph (3) subjects the non 501c3 Church with a freehold
title in land to a subjected vassal of the state with mere
privileges subjecting it to governmental strangulation.
(3) the term `land use regulation' means a law or decision by a
government that limits or restricts a private person's uses or
development of land, or of structures affixed to land, where the
law or decision applies to one or more particular parcels of
land or to land within one or more designated geographical
zones, and where the private person has an ownership, leasehold,
easement, servitude, or other property interest in the regulated
land, or a contract or option to acquire such an interest;
And Paragraph (5) again places access to a right only after
proof to the judiciary.
(5) the term `demonstrates' means meets the burdens of going
forward with the evidence and of persuasion; and
Paragraph (6) broadly redefines "the term `government'--(A)
means--(i) a State, county, municipality, or other governmental
entity created under the authority of a State;
(ii) any branch, department, agency, instrumentality,
subdivision, or official of an entity listed in clause (i); and
(iii) any other person acting under color of State law; and
(B) for the purposes of sections 3(a) and 5, includes the United
States, a branch, department, agency, instrumentality or
official of the United States, and any person acting under color
of Federal law. Union Calendar No. 125"
The phrase "any person acting under color of Federal law" is a
stunning vote for tyrannical anarchy. "Color of law" in Black's
3rd is defined "The appearance or semblance, without the
substance, and legal right."
What does all this mean to those seeking freedom in
America?
The door is closing . Shall you be sealed in or out of the
LORD's house?
Religious freedom in America was the last bastion of freedom
and liberty in the world today and it is about to suffer another
killing blow from the federal government of the United States
Almost every person in the world no longer truly owns the land
upon which they live. The have settled for a mere legal title.
The holder of a legal title to anything is not the owner of the
property. A legal title is not a freehold, allodial, true and
actual title or a fee simple title.
Although a "legal title" is "one cognizable... in a court of
law."3 It is only "complete and perfect so far as regards the
apparent right of ownership and possession, but which carries no
beneficial interest in the property, another person being
equitably entitled thereto; in either case, the antithesis of
'equitable title.'"4
The appearance of a right of ownership is not the same as
ownership which is evident in the fact that a legal title
"carries no beneficial interest in the property". Beneficial
interest does not include a right to the "profit, benefit, or
advantage resulting from a contract," nor does it include "the
ownership of an estate." After all, a beneficial interest is
"distinct from the legal ownership."5 In the simplest of terms a
legal title only appears to be a right to ownership but it does
not include the right to the use of the property, its profit and
benefit and it is not the "ownership of an estate."
In order to maintain access to the use of the property you only
have a mere legal title to you must pay the use tax, also called
an excise tax and in Rome and the Bible was called tribute.
How doth the city sit solitary, [that was] full of people!
[how] is she become as a widow! she [that was] great among the
nations, [and] princess among the provinces, [how] is she become
tributary ! (La 1:1)
The word 'use' is described, in Black's Law Dictionary 3rd
p1787. Bouvier's,as a "A right in one person, so called the
cestui que use, to take the profits of land of which another has
legal title and possession, together with the duty of defending
the same and of making estates therefore according to the
direction of the cestui que use." A use by nature then is a
trust. "Uses and trusts are not so much different things as
different aspects of the same subject." 6
The most important aspect of a legal title to understand is
that it is the "antithesis" or the opposite of an "equitable
title." An equitable title as opposed to a legal title "is a
right in the party" rather than only appearing to be a right.
More important it is "the beneficial interest of one person whom
equity regards as the real owner, although the legal title is
vested in another."7
Abolition of private property. First plank of the COMMUNIST
MANIFESTO
The importance of the fact that no one owns the land upon which
they are domiciled begins to take on an ominous perspective when
we realize that a "Freeman; the possessors of allodial lands."8
And with out the freehold title in land our rights as freemen
are diminished.
"Liber homo. A free man; a freeman lawfully competent to act as
juror.9 An allodial proprietor, as distinguished from a vassal
or feudatory."10
Even our citizenship in a free republic is drastically altered.
"The words 'citizen' and 'citizenship,' however, usually include
the idea of domicile."11
This division of legal title on the one hand and equitable title
on the other is known as "equitable conversion". The reverse of
this process and a return to a true and actual title is known as
equitable reconversion.
This reconversion is relatively simple to accomplish but almost
impossible to maintain in the wilderness of judicial and
bureaucratic ignorance found in America today.
Whoso causeth the righteous to go astray in an evil way, he
shall fall himself into his own pit: but the upright shall have
good [things] in possession. (Proverbs 28:10)
When the non 501c3 Church purchases a parcel of land and
removes it from the tax roles they are virtually equitably
reconverting the title. This conversion of title by the free
Church is the last hope of freedom in America.
And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for
yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which
your fathers served that were on the other side of the river, or
the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell. But as for me
and my house, we will serve the Lord. (Joshua 24:15)
Gregory at the ekklesia
|
|
