Thoughts to ponder

[Jerry Pitts]

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...us/99/700.html
IN RE SINKING FUND CASES, 99 U.S. 700 (1878)
99 U.S. 700 (L.Ed.)
SINKING-FUND CASES.
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
v.
UNITED STATES.
CENTRAL PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY
v.
GALLATIN.
October Term, 1878


“If the government will not keep its faith, little better can be expected from the citizen. If contracts are not observed, no property will in the end be respected; and all history shows that rights of persons are unsafe where property is insecure. Protection to one goes with protection to the other; and there can be neither prosperity nor progress where this foundation of all just government is unsettled. 'The moment,' said the elder Adams, 'the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.' “


WARE v. HYLTON, 3 U.S. 199 (1796)

"It is not necessary to enquire, how the judicial authority should act, if the Legislature were evidently to violate any of the laws of God; but property is the creature of civil society, and subject, in all respects, to the disposition and controul of civil institutions."

From the foundation of this Country, the subject of God has been repeatedly mentioned in the United States Supreme Court. Therefore, this highest court of the nation, gives due recognition to the existence of God.

Jerry Carlos

[Lawdog]

Correction:

They have on occasion, for rhetorical purposes, referenced their BELIEF in the existence of God.

If an Indian court referenced the Hindu gods Shiva or Vishnu, would you take that as "proof" that those gods exist?

Beliefs, remember, are not the same as facts.

If any philosopher wrote a book that proved the existence or non-existence of God, he or she would surely win the Nobel Prize for Literature for solving such an ancient debate.

I personally believe in God, a higher power, whatever you want to call it. However, I am aware that my belief is not proof. That you are not calls into question the extent of your intellectual development.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

Correction:

They have on occasion, for rhetorical purposes, referenced their BELIEF in the existence of God.

If an Indian court referenced the Hindu gods Shiva or Vishnu, would you take that as "proof" that those gods exist?

Beliefs, remember, are not the same as facts.

If any philosopher wrote a book that proved the existence or non-existence of God, he or she would surely win the Nobel Prize for Literature for solving such an ancient debate.

I personally believe in God, a higher power, whatever you want to call it. However, I am aware that my belief is not proof. That you are not calls into question the extent of your intellectual development.

That you cannot explain what "The Law" or "just plain law" is, equally proves that you have a problem with your intellectual development. It is also obvious to the reader that your entire post is an attempt to dis the subject of "God", due to the FACT that you state you "believe in God", then immediately in your mind and on the computer screen, reduce "God" to "it".

"probable cause: Apparent facts discovered through logical inquiry that would lead a reasonably intelligent and prudent person to believe that an accused person has committed a crime, thereby warranting his or her prosecution, or that a Cause of Action has accrued, justifying a civil lawsuit."

Because 'logical inquiry' can only be an intellectual process, and the definition excludes the physical reality, then the 'apparent'(ness) cannot be related to definition #1 below.

apparent

adjective

1. readily seen; visible
2. readily understood or perceived; evident; obvious
3. appearing (but not necessarily) real or true; seeming

Clearly apparent to the mind

lucid, conclusive, explicit, understood, intelligible, comprehensible, self-evident, patent, indisputable, unquestionable, undeniable, blatant, axiomatic, proverbial, aphoristic, reasonable, broad, unequivocal, unambiguous, on the surface, unmysterious, as plain as the nose on one's face*, going without saying*, staring one in the face*, open and shut*; see also definite 1, understandable.



Have a nice day.

Jerry Carlos

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts

That you cannot explain what "The Law" or "just plain law" is, equally proves that you have a problem with your intellectual development.
Jerry Carlos

The questions are ridiculously vague. For one thing, what is this "Law" with a capital L you refer to? Is it different from "law"?

What a person means by "law" can vary widely depending on context. To an Orthodox Jew, it often means the Torah. To a Catholic priest, it might refer to Canon Law, the rules of the Catholic Church.

Since this is (allegedly) a forum about secular law, that is what I mean when I am talking about the law, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. I am interested in talking about the federal and state laws in the United States.

As far as use of the pronoun "it", I did that merely to be gender neutral. The God or higher power I believe in does not have a sex or gender in the same sense that human beings do.

Bottom line...I'm not one of the folks on here who espouses bizarre theories that have never been accepted by any court in this country. My intellectual development is just fine.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

The questions are ridiculously vague. For one thing, what is this "Law" with a capital L you refer to? Is it different from "law"?

What a person means by "law" can vary widely depending on context. To an Orthodox Jew, it often means the Torah. To a Catholic priest, it might refer to Canon Law, the rules of the Catholic Church.

Since this is (allegedly) a forum about secular law, that is what I mean when I am talking about the law, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. I am interested in talking about the federal and state laws in the United States.

As far as use of the pronoun "it", I did that merely to be gender neutral. The God or higher power I believe in does not have a sex or gender in the same sense that human beings do.

Bottom line...I'm not one of the folks on here who espouses bizarre theories that have never been accepted by any court in this country. My intellectual development is just fine.

Well Praise Yahweh (God) anyway. Even though I am not positively sure that the God you believe in is the same God that I believe in, at least you are acknowledging that there is a God. Now because God is that Supreme Being that Created everything that was created, then it stands to reason that even the various Bar Association Buildings, books, pens, paper, computers, Black Robes, and over in England, even those sissy looking wigs that the men(?) wear, let us not forget to mention the FRN's that your brotherhood enjoys spending; are all the property of Yahweh. Why? Because Yahweh created them. The Creator is always the owner of the creation.

Now, as for your reducing the status of "God" to that of 'it'. Good grief man.. do a simple check out on the differences in definitions.

In all of the examples you specified as 'law', none of them are the law. The Law is the Commandments of the Creator, Yahweh. If the Creator decides to inscribe a new set of Laws (in other words, put them in a different medium than what was originally used) then that privilege would be up to Yahweh. All of your examples point to the Laws that were written by Yahweh. Perhaps using a different name, but the fact is that name is always capitalized, never in the lower case, as then 'it' is representing something other than the REAL Yahweh.

Have a nice evening.... and by the way... Praise Yahweh.

Jerry Carlos

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts

Well Praise Yahweh (God) anyway. Even though I am not positively sure that the God you believe in is the same God that I believe in, at least you are acknowledging that there is a God. Now because God is that Supreme Being that Created everything that was created, then it stands to reason that even the various Bar Association Buildings, books, pens, paper, computers, Black Robes, and over in England, even those sissy looking wigs that the men(?) wear, let us not forget to mention the FRN's that your brotherhood enjoys spending; are all the property of Yahweh. Why? Because Yahweh created them. The Creator is always the owner of the creation.

Now, as for your reducing the status of "God" to that of 'it'. Good grief man.. do a simple check out on the differences in definitions.

In all of the examples you specified as 'law', none of them are the law. The Law is the Commandments of the Creator, Yahweh. If the Creator decides to inscribe a new set of Laws (in other words, put them in a different medium than what was originally used) then that privilege would be up to Yahweh. All of your examples point to the Laws that were written by Yahweh. Perhaps using a different name, but the fact is that name is always capitalized, never in the lower case, as then 'it' is representing something other than the REAL Yahweh.

Have a nice evening.... and by the way... Praise Yahweh.

Jerry Carlos

Nice post Jerry. It's always refreshing to be reminded where all true and righteous authority emanates.

Blessings to you!

[Lawdog]

I am convinced you simply don't have the ability to comprehend what you read.

To repeat myself...I BELIEVE there is a God or higher power in the universe. However, since my IQ is, apparently unlike yours, above room temperature, I understand that my BELIEF in something does not make it a FACT.

A crazy person might honestly BELIEVE he is Napoleon, or from another planet. Doesn't make it so, my boy.

Repeat after me...BELIEFS ARE NOT FACTS OR KNOWLEDGE!!!!

Humans have debated for untold millenia whether there was one God, many gods, or no gods. This is not a subject that can be solved by empirical proof. Many brilliant people have believed in God, such as Albert Einstein and Sir Isaac Newton. Many other brilliant people have been atheists, such as Sigmund Freud and Pierre Curie.

Believe in whatever you want. Just grow up and accept that beliefs and facts are NOT the same things.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

I am convinced you simply don't have the ability to comprehend what you read.

To repeat myself...I BELIEVE there is a God or higher power in the universe. However, since my IQ is, apparently unlike yours, above room temperature, I understand that my BELIEF in something does not make it a FACT.

A crazy person might honestly BELIEVE he is Napoleon, or from another planet. Doesn't make it so, my boy.

Repeat after me...BELIEFS ARE NOT FACTS OR KNOWLEDGE!!!!

Humans have debated for untold millenia whether there was one God, many gods, or no gods. This is not a subject that can be solved by empirical proof. Many brilliant people have believed in God, such as Albert Einstein and Sir Isaac Newton. Many other brilliant people have been atheists, such as Sigmund Freud and Pierre Curie.

Believe in whatever you want. Just grow up and accept that beliefs and facts are NOT the same things.

Tsk Tsk Tsk. Not much of a 'man of your word' Puppydog.

Originally Posted by Lawdog

I'm not going to debate religion with you or anyone else. It just does not interest me.

Originally Posted by Lawdog

What exactly are you afraid of, kid? People who are secure in their beliefs are never afraid of spirited, vigorous debate.

Why do you desire to tell a lie (as indicated above) by continuing in your attempt to dissuade others in regard to what is being brought to their attention from the onset of this thread? Do you NOT know your own mind? Does NOT your word mean anything to you? Have you NO honor? Have you NO self-respect?

Based upon the number of posts you have made on this thread alone regarding 'religion', gives evidence that you are "interest"ed in the discussion/debate.

The thread was NOT formulated to inspire an absolute dialog between just you and me. I was actually hoping that the 'religion' aspect of it would drive you away -- I mean after all, you did say that "It just does not interest me.", speaking in reference to discussion/debate of 'religion'.

I presume that you are chronologically a 'grown up', so there is no point in suggesting that you 'grow up', but I would suggest that you look internally very deeply and find the solution to your problem that you have in controlling your tongue (analogously speaking -- we all know that it is really your fingers that are doing the talking), but then again, perhaps it might be suggestive that you visit the High Priest of your system of worship and ask that he/she/it give you spiritual guidance.

I will pray for your recovery from this dreadful condition.

Jerry Carlos

[palani]

FACTS = EVIL DEEDS

Originally Posted by Lawdog

I understand that my BELIEF in something does not make it a FACT.

fact 1539, "action," especially "evil deed," from L. factum "event, occurrence," lit. "thing done," from neut. pp. of facere "to do" (see factitious). Usual modern sense of "thing known to be true" appeared 1632, from notion of "something that has actually occurred."

Originally Posted by Lawdog might have actually meant to say this:

I understand that my BELIEF in something does not make it an EVIL DEED.

Almost biblical, wouldn't you agree?

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

A crazy person might honestly BELIEVE he is Napoleon, or from another planet. Doesn't make it so, my boy.

A quisling BAR Association Esquire might honestly BELIEVE he is a productive member of a domestic population. Doesn't make it so, my boy.

Repeat after me...: "beliefs ARE NOT facts," kiddo.

Wise up, son.