Rights are a form of entitlements. The question is if we have a right then who pays for it? Do we have the Rights of Parasites given as legal rights by other men; or do we have the rights of Spiritual Beings? This is the question of the ages.
We have a right to what we created or obtained by trade from its creator.
Property rights are under attack. Find Out why and from where the attacks are coming.
There is a clear distinction between legal rights and human rights, don't be misled.
We have rights to what we create and to the value we produce; we are not entitled to the wealth of others.
Christians do not just have the duty to turn the other cheek and be charitable. Duties can only be realized in a culture that respects our rights.
Without assets, without lands, without property, without what is ours we have no rights. Learn more about human rights.
The planet belongs to the people, not governments, agents or experts. We the people have rights based on our status as owners of our lands. We are not visitors or guests but persons with inalienable rights given to us by God.
All persons everywhere are entitled to rights based on their status as owners and caretakers of the lands they inhabit. All persons are able to create value and participate in the administration of the planet’s resources. This capacity inherent in all persons gives us our private property rights. We own what we create.
All impositions and limitations on property are an infringement of our human rights to what we create. All claims made by the state as to its right to administrate, legislate, regulate or allocate property infringes upon the human rights of all. We the people have the right and duty to organize and administrate the property that falls under our jurisdiction. We the people have full authority to privatize and administrate the justice function.
Our human rights cannot be rescinded, abridged or diminished. Our property rights are a human right applicable to all persons in all places, administrated and validated by all persons everywhere and not modified or abridged by any state. Human rights are equally valid and applicable to all persons in all times and all places.
We are not visitors to this place, we are not migrants, we are not guests nor pilgrims, we are owners of these places we call home. These are our lands. We built these places, we have made ourselves accountable for its condition, we are stewards of this land and the lords of our domain. We resent all intrusions and uninvited persons. This is our home. It is where we live, work, play and worship, raise our families and ensure our future. We will not be moved, quelled, intimidated or relocated or silenced nor shamed into silence.
Our property is ours. We are not parasites. We work to own what is ours. We live by right of possession as creators of what we have. We care for what is ours. We claim that on which we stand. We will not be moved.
No state has the power or authority to remove from us which is ours by right of possession. No state has the intrinsic authority to take from us our human right to what we produce. What we create we own by the power and authority of a God no state or other agency can overrule. We the people stand firm, as the church, the supreme authority over our lands given to us by God.
We the people are not ashamed of our rights. We stand firm on our human rights based on the authority given to us by God to lands given to us by God, according to the power of the authority of God as exercised in and through the church. Our rights to our place are inalienable, they cannot be revoked, rescinded or removed. No person or group of people has the power, nor legitimacy nor justification to remove from us our human rights to what we created or were given. All claims but that of the creator are invalid. If you did not create it, you do not own it and you have no rights regarding it. Stay off. Stay away. We throw down the gauntlet. Parasites of all stripes and types beware; you came, you fed, you sucked the blood of patriots dry but we rise again with faith and vengeance and we will cut you off. We are no longer your cattle or your sheep nor a passive source of sustenance.
We the people throw down the gauntlet, stand with us or stand against the right of the church to live as God intended. Oppose us and you oppose the rights of all peoples in all places tin all times to own what they produced. Unite with us or fight against us. Build the church or create division. Without human rights there is no justice and no church and no peace. Without justice there is no reason to live. Leave us now in peace to build our church as a people united under God.
Are you an aggrieved property owner? Are you angry because you feel your rights are being abused? Have you worked all your life to get things you need and then saw what you had worked for being systematically removed from you?
Like many others you did not ask for or expect a free ride. You did your part and you assumed you would not be treated worse than those who gave as little as possible and took what they could.
You help the needy, the sick, the old and the disabled. You accepted you would need to carry the burdens of the less fortunate but the need never declined. Year after year the need grows yet we are hardly better off than those who never lifted a finger to help anyone, let alone us.
We cannot go shopping without beggars inside and outside of every store. Food Banks need our help as do hospitals, churches, the victims of natural disasters and every kind of charity one can think of. Our leaders send billions into the coffers of other nations while the national accounts bleed red.
But do we have any right to complain? Are we heirs to white privilege and European cultural arrogance? Is the world’s borders natural and empirically valid?
What right has anyone to claim they are patriots? Are we not all equal persons with an equal say to the earth?
Liberals suggest people have no right to a nation state and that all claims to lands and culture are due to racism, xenophobia and cultural snobbery.
The empirical response to this would be to ask for empirical evidence. It might be suggested we look for actual lines where borders are meant to be or a sign that tells us this bit of land belongs to a specific group be virtue of natural law. Not seeing these things liberals say the conservative position is subjective and even vile.
To devise an experiment to arbitrate between these two extremes we have to find out where the line dividing the two points exists. No one argues that a border is a natural division even when natural barriers are used as a national border.
The fact that a border may simply be concrete pillars put into the ground every several hundred feet does not make it less of a border than a mountain range or a barricade defended by armed soldiers.
It is nonsensical to say borders do not exist because they are not natural because it is not because of nature why they are said to exist.
If we reject the validity of a border around a nation then do we eliminate the borders around a city, a province or state or parish? Do we eliminate lines on a road, property boundaries, and even the line between right and wrong because none of these things have their origin in the material world, all are human creations? Yes, we can prove borders are not natural phenomenon but what has this to do with the issue?
We can prove that alligator skin leaves do not exist, but the finding does not give us any new information or a stronger foundation on which to make other predictions.
Good and evil are not separate qualities because there is a line between them, two nations are not divided one from the other because someone notice a line was drawn by nature. God and the devil are not distinct beings because there is a line that cuts what would otherwise be a single creature in two.
Canada and the USA regardless of their similarities are different, that is why we are not the same and it is the fact that we are different that creates a border. It is not the border that produces the US and Canada it is Canada and the US that creates the border.
If we mix oil and water, we see a viscous barrier. This border does not divide two different viscosities, it is the viscosities that produces the illusion of a line. Thus, we see the argument that nature does not produce borders is a non-issue. There is no border to remove in the sense that liberals want a border eliminated. If they cannot see a line, then they cannot go to a nations outer limits and pick up the border and take it away. What needs to be done is to remove the differences that produced the border in the first place.
Empiricism does not just produce experiments it demonstrates when an experiment is inappropriate. The border between the US and Mexico, for example, could be eliminate in a legal and political sense but the cultural and historic factors that led to the border will remain. The argument that borders need to come down is based on a failure to understand what a border is and its purpose. Oil and water will not mix and other things are divided because they do not mix well and if missed lose their identity. If liberals wish to eliminate the border what they need to do is demonstrate that the national identity is empirically invalid.
So, far as the claim that borders do not exist, that claim is validated and judged empirically without content. That which does not exist cannot be proved to exist and since no one has claimed borders are a natural phenomenon the positive finding has no empirical consequence. No predictions are generated by the conclusion.
We are all equal under God because He is of equal value to all of us. To all He has given the gift of time.
No one has a claim to what they did not create including that which others created. We the creators have a right to defend the work of our hands from usurpers and parasites who lay claim to what they have no right to. We must defend our rights against the entitlements and special privileges claimed by some. Human rights can only be valid within a policy of equal rights. If we are not equal human rights are invalid.
The Doctrine of “equal rights for all – special rights for none,” means no one can claim special privilege or entitlements.
Equal Rights are enshrined in the Principle of Subsidiarity; the organizing principle that states matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralized competent authority. Political decisions should be taken at a local level if possible, rather than by a central authority. (Wikipedia).
Equal rights mean ownership of local resources by locals; no ownership of local resources by non-locals.
The systematic elimination of ownership of local resources by non-locals.
Positivists are obligated to fight for the equal rights of all and oppose all special rights regardless of the person or group. Any other path is negative. Positivists ask only for a level playing field.
People only know Christians have duties. We are obliged to turn the other cheek, to be charitable, to love all and sundry regardless of the situation. Our God is a God of Love and Forgiveness but to express this in works that are done without discrimination is a life devoid of fruit. Not only will we be exploited by the worst sort of people we will be shunned by the best.
What friend treats your worst enemy with the same attention and generosity with which she treats you?
Duties can only be fulfilled in an environment in which Rights are respected. Love and charity is as much about defending human rights as about forgiving wrongs done you. Indeed the greatest travesty of justice and the most unchristian thing we could do is to forgive sins committed against someone else.
We do not chastise others for what they do to us but for what they do to others and the church of God.
Christians cannot sit idly by as others are harmed or as the church itself is harmed. This is not Christianity and it is not good politics.
We ask you the people of God to rise up against injustice, speak out against unfairness, do something about the wrongs you see. Join with us so we can stand shoulder to shoulder against Babylon and bear fruits of repentance that meets with the approval of God.
Humans have rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of wealth or value. People have a right to shelter, to food and attire. Other things could be listed but without the right to employment and to property these rights and any others one can think of are moot.
One has a right to the property one creates, no one can impose a claim on property someone else creates. This poses a problem for Globalists because it is impossible to be a Globalist without accepting restraints on human rights.
This is a logical conundrum that cannot be resolved. We either respect human rights or abandon the Word of God as Globalists have.
defeating silence with the sword of truth
Legal rights are products of a liberal state. Legal rights ferment social division and social injustice. The worlds political and economic systems are based on legal rights and are corrosive of the social order. Anything that produces social division creates injustice. Injustice offends our human rights. Injustice destroys peace, prosperity and progress. Injustice destroys the rights of man.
Governments are the source of legal rights. Any right that is given is a right that can be removed. If your rights rest on the power of the state your freedom depends on the mercy of the state.