Difference between revisions of "Birth registration"

From PreparingYou
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
"He who is in the womb is considered as born, whenever his benefit is concerned."<Ref>Qui in utero est, pro jam nato habetur questice de ejus commando quæritur</Ref>
 
"He who is in the womb is considered as born, whenever his benefit is concerned."<Ref>Qui in utero est, pro jam nato habetur questice de ejus commando quæritur</Ref>
  
The Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act was "for the promotion, the welfare and hygiene of maternity and infancy and for other purposes," The Senate passed it with a vote of 63 to 7, and by the House with a vote of 279 to 39, and was finally signed by the president and became law on Nov. 23, 1921. The act provided for the current fiscal year (1922) $10,000 for each state accepting the provisions of the act, and the additional sum of $1,000,000.
+
The Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act was "for the promotion, the [[Welfare|welfare]] and hygiene of maternity and infancy and for other purposes," The Senate passed it with a vote of 63 to 7, and by the House with a vote of 279 to 39, and was finally signed by the president and became law on Nov. 23, 1921. The act provided for the current fiscal year (1922) $10,000 for each state accepting the provisions of the act, and the additional sum of $1,000,000.
  
 
The bill was a direct outgrowth of a nine year study made by the "Federal Children's Bureau." Note the Bureau was not the federal bureau for children but the bureau of the federal children. This act and the acceptance of its benefits by the states created the "United States birth registration area."<Ref>Public Law 97, 67th Congress, Session I, Chap. 135, 1921. The United States expanding birth registration area, in 1915 it comprised 10 States and the District of Columbia; in 1933 the entire continental United States. Economic Security Act page 366. http://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/s35lenroot.pdf</Ref>
 
The bill was a direct outgrowth of a nine year study made by the "Federal Children's Bureau." Note the Bureau was not the federal bureau for children but the bureau of the federal children. This act and the acceptance of its benefits by the states created the "United States birth registration area."<Ref>Public Law 97, 67th Congress, Session I, Chap. 135, 1921. The United States expanding birth registration area, in 1915 it comprised 10 States and the District of Columbia; in 1933 the entire continental United States. Economic Security Act page 366. http://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/s35lenroot.pdf</Ref>
Line 21: Line 21:
  
  
Rome had a vast system of welfare. Those who registered with Rome and its increasing socialist state were eligible for free bread. Rome imported 500,000,000 bushels of this grain each year from Egypt alone. There was a great deal of free entertainment provided and a general promise of social security to those who chose to be a part of the offered system of [[Corban]]. The United States government is simply carrying on the Roman tradition and custom when it began birth registration to care for its children.
+
Rome had a vast system of [[Welfare|welfare]]. Those who registered with Rome and its increasing socialist state were eligible for free bread. Rome imported 500,000,000 bushels of this grain each year from Egypt alone. There was a great deal of free entertainment provided and a general promise of social security to those who chose to be a part of the offered system of [[Corban]]. The United States government is simply carrying on the Roman tradition and custom when it began birth registration to care for its children.
  
 
The parents have likely already asked permission of the government to marry subjecting the products of the [[http://www.hisholychurch.net/study/gods/cog1mvm.php marriage]] to the state. They have likely [http://www.hisholychurch.net/study/gods/cog4eve.php sold their labor] to obtain a [http://www.hisholychurch.org/news/articles/notsecuress.php personal social security].
 
The parents have likely already asked permission of the government to marry subjecting the products of the [[http://www.hisholychurch.net/study/gods/cog1mvm.php marriage]] to the state. They have likely [http://www.hisholychurch.net/study/gods/cog4eve.php sold their labor] to obtain a [http://www.hisholychurch.org/news/articles/notsecuress.php personal social security].

Revision as of 19:33, 9 February 2014

"He who is in the womb is considered as born, whenever his benefit is concerned."[1]

The Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act was "for the promotion, the welfare and hygiene of maternity and infancy and for other purposes," The Senate passed it with a vote of 63 to 7, and by the House with a vote of 279 to 39, and was finally signed by the president and became law on Nov. 23, 1921. The act provided for the current fiscal year (1922) $10,000 for each state accepting the provisions of the act, and the additional sum of $1,000,000.

The bill was a direct outgrowth of a nine year study made by the "Federal Children's Bureau." Note the Bureau was not the federal bureau for children but the bureau of the federal children. This act and the acceptance of its benefits by the states created the "United States birth registration area."[2]

Why does the United States need to register your birth? Because the United States acts as Rome. It sits in the usurped position of your Father and demands your faithful obedience.

Did the federal government have the right to impose such legislation on the States? In 1923, it was argued by Mr. Alexander Lincoln, Assistant Attorney General of Massachusetts, "The act is unconstitutional. It purports to vest in agencies of the Federal Government powers which are almost wholly undefined, in matters relating to maternity and infancy, and to authorize appropriations of federal funds for the purposes of the act." The complaint went on to state that, "The act is invalid because it assumes powers not granted to Congress and usurps the local police power." "The act is not made valid by the circumstance that federal powers are to be exercised only with respect to those States which accept the act, for Congress cannot assume, and state legislatures cannot yield, the powers reserved to the States by the Constitution. The act is invalid because it imposes on each State an illegal option either to yield a part of its powers reserved by the Tenth Amendment or to give up its share of appropriations under the act." [3]

In the final analysis the Act was an offer from one corporate entity to others for the purpose of providing an avenue for the individual citizen of America to register as a subject of the State and therefore a citizen of the Federal corporate State, the superior sovereign agent, called the United States. The federal government would assume the position of Patron as the natural fathers emancipate their children from God’s institution, the family, into the hands of man made institutions and the substitute father.

The vicarious patri or substitute father becomes the patronus of the infant citizen according to the law of Parens Patriae, Obey the Father. Even the United States Codes verify this parental relationship using the Latin in their own US codes.[4]

Once you are registered as a child of the State there are many benefits and paths open to you. The state stands in the position of patron and supplies both tutor and curator for the child. The patron never entirely releases the child to the status of sui juris as long as they depend upon the gracious benefits of the State.

Without the exercise of rugged individualism that comes from an independent self reliant family the people are brought down to a weakened state of apathy and self indulgence.

"Society in every state is a blessing, but a government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." Thomas Paine.


Rome had a vast system of welfare. Those who registered with Rome and its increasing socialist state were eligible for free bread. Rome imported 500,000,000 bushels of this grain each year from Egypt alone. There was a great deal of free entertainment provided and a general promise of social security to those who chose to be a part of the offered system of Corban. The United States government is simply carrying on the Roman tradition and custom when it began birth registration to care for its children.

The parents have likely already asked permission of the government to marry subjecting the products of the [marriage] to the state. They have likely sold their labor to obtain a personal social security.

Parents enter the hospital signing and granting permission to that corporate entity and its licensed officers the right to determine the best interest of the child and to register the child with its patron.

"(2) Birth Registration Document. The Social Security Administration (SSA) may enter into an agreement with officials of a State... to establish, as part of the official birth registration process, a procedure to assist SSA in assigning social security numbers to newborn children. Where an agreement is in effect, a parent, as part of the official birth registration process, need not complete a Form SS-5 and may request that SSA assign a social security number to the newborn child."[5]

The birth certificate was a clear granting of gifts, gratuities and benefits, by government, to a child while it was still in the womb of his natural mother. All the children who were certified by the signature and seal of a natural parent, or a professional doctor and the representing county and state were eligible for further federal and state benefits as a federal child of the state. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; refs with no name must have content

Call no man on earth

This threefold process of abdication through Novation[6], Tutor[7] and Korban[8]. By the natural fathers and patriarchs of each household bound the sons and daughters into the power of the Patronus of the State.

Nothing will stir the angry ardor and abhorrence of those in the system more than rejection of benefits and offers or non compliance with the state of affairs or affairs of the State. To say in a pristine and orderly hospital, "I am the Father and I have taken responsibility for this Child" can stir a great wrath from many within those sacred chambers and send waves of stirring reality rippling through those hollowed halls.

The Latin word pater means father. As we have seen the word was used as a title of the Emperor and before him the pro council was referred to as the father of the senate and therefore the Empire. Pater or patri was also an address in reference to the Senators of Rome. The Roman's developed an elected congress to introduce the proposed bills for the enfranchised citizenry who were subject to the statutes of men. This congress was called patres consritpi, the conscripted fathers [see Citizen vs. Citizen].

We can assume that the people of the Roman Empire when they heard the word pater thought of one of several ideas. Either they were talking about their genetic father and their Creator Father in heaven, or their substitute fathers in Rome.

  • Jesus said, “And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” (Mtt. 23:9)

To make such a statement was a shock to those who thought man's governments and the Roman political and judicial system, with its peace and commerce, was good for society and the business of men. This would be like saying call no man on earth president or senator or congressman.

In that Greek text of Matthew we find the word Pater[9] meaning father in the Latin. When Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world he did not use the Greek word for earth or planet or inhabited places or age that are also translated into world. The word world there is kosmos[10] “meaning a harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government”.[11]

This was a jurisdictional statement. To call no man father was a jurisdictional statement. To be baptized was a jurisdictional event of allegiance. To worship is an act of homage to a lord or King. Jesus did not preach the religion of heaven but the kingdom.

Although, increasingly more common amongst the member nations of the world of Rome, birth registration by the state did not become mandatory until Marcus Aurelius who once said, "Everything--a horse, a vine--is created for some duty... For what task, then, were you yourself created? A man's true delight is to do the things he was made for."

A Roman boy was not a citizen until he was old enough to put on a man's toga and pay into the patrimonial offerings of its Qurban, but his father needed to register the child's name and the date of its birth to be eligible for those privileges which came from the Parens Patriae, The Father of the Country.

Marcus Aurelius, in the latter part of the second century, was the first Emperor to make that birth registration with the Treasury Department mandatory within thirty days of the birth. Marcus though benevolent in all other respects had the worst record of official persecution of Christians than any other Emperor and President of Rome.

It had always been an option for the people to apply to the State for an enfranchised citizenship. Marcus Aurelius wanted no child to be left behind. He required by law that everyone must register the birth of their children with the Secretary of Treasury or Provincial Registrars within 30 days.

The Christians could not. Such registration would be an application to the Father of the Roman State and would be turning from Christ’s command. The State became the “In Loco Parentis” which in the Latin, means “in the place of a parent” which is a turning away from the Natural Family instituted by God.

Christians could not assent to the registering of their children under the authority of another person acting as the father of the people. Such registration would not only be disobedient to Christ's solemn command of call no man on earth father but it would also be an application or prayer to that earthly Father, or benefactor, to obtain the gifts of his civil altars. Those altars compelled a contribution by its authority. That authority was established by the people who by application or prayer to the state under oath went under the authority of the state or increased that authority through participation. Such oaths were forbidden by the gospel of Christ but often ignored by modern Christians and their teachers. The State would truly be "in the place of a parent", a father not in heaven but in the Capitol of Rome.



See more Forbidden Definitions


Newsletter | Dear Network | Network Notes | The Kingdom Newsletter |
Thought for the day | Events List | Free speech | Conversation

Footnotes

  1. Qui in utero est, pro jam nato habetur questice de ejus commando quæritur
  2. Public Law 97, 67th Congress, Session I, Chap. 135, 1921. The United States expanding birth registration area, in 1915 it comprised 10 States and the District of Columbia; in 1933 the entire continental United States. Economic Security Act page 366. http://www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/s35lenroot.pdf
  3. Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury et.al.. 262 U.S. 447, 67 L.Ed. 1078, 43 S. Ct. 597.
  4. See USC TITLE 15, Sec. 15h. Applicability of Parens Patriae actions: STATUTE- Sections 15c, 15d, 15e, 15f, and 15g of this title shall apply in any State, unless such State provides by law for its non-applicability in such State.
  5. 20 C.F.R., section 422.103
  6. “the remodeling of an old obligation.” Webster's Dictionary
  7. tutor -ari, dep.: also tuto -are: to protect, watch, keep. guard against.
  8. Bringing closer to the originator or father, even a substitute father.
  9. (pathr) Strong's No. 3962 pater {pat-ayr'} 1) generator or male ancestor2) metaph.2a) the originator and transmitter of anything; the authors of a family or society of persons animated by the same spirit as himself; one who has infused his own spirit into others, who actuates and governs their minds 2b) one who stands in a father's place and looks after another in a paternal way ...Bible and Concordance. W.B. F..
  10. Strong's No. 2889 kosmos {kos'-mos} probably from the base of 2865; n m AV - world (186) - adorning (1) [187] 1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government.... , Woodside B. F. 1991.
  11. http://www.hisholychurch.net/news/articles/world.php