Monday, December 1, 2014

Marriage License

Today we have marriage license, it is the way of the world, and most people, have not a clue as to the history, reason, or origin behind the marriage license. This is the beginning of altering traditions for the betterment of people’s desire. Only in reality, altering their perception of what are valid marriages, and their relationship with God.
Beginning in the late seventeenth century, laws were passed forbidding marriage between whites and blacks, discriminating against the mixed offspring of informal liaisons (Caldwell, 2013). This shows how far some people will go to separate society, slaves, and masters. With slavery came the emergence of race. Socially, previously people’s appearance and origins had not mattered, particularly among the working class; religion was the reason for persecution, not race. If there were never any slaves, would race have been such a massive issue? “Extreme racist propaganda, which represented black males as ravening beasts lusting after white women, served to rationalize the practice of lynching” slaves or any black man (Caldwell, 2013).
The “license” root is from licentiousness:[1] licentious (adj.): “morally unrestrained: wickedness”. The legal definition of a “license” is permission to do an act of which without such permission would be illegal (or immoral): issued by a fiction (corporation, government entity, etc.) is a permit rendered to another fiction (legal entity) to do what would be otherwise against nature’s law: allow a fiction to rule over truth (Duff, 2013). A “marriage license” is defined as, “A license or permission granted by public authority (not God) to persons who intend to intermarry.” “Person” is defined as: a fictitious entity, such as a corporation, created by law and given certain legal rights and duties. “Intermarry” is defined as, “Miscegenation; mixed or interracial marriages” (Garner, 1999): it is the way of the world, not God’s way.
Denying marriages of those that love each other, for no other reason than “race”, was considered the right of the State, Church, or community. As such, anyone can deny any service to anyone of an interracial marriage due to it being claimed as illegal or immoral. The claim of illegal or immoral marriages between those that loved each other allowed the denying of housing, food, jobs, and basic living: forcing people into criminal activity to survive. None-the-less, denial of the right to marry is against the right of “all men to pursue happiness” and thus repugnant. In addition, as all crimes are commercial,[2] of which is commerce, and the United States has the right to regulated commerce,[3] prevent criminal activity; therefore, agents of the government could step in to end the brutality of people toward interracial marriage by way of the license; giving the government the ability to control how their property is being treated. You cannot license what God controls.
Before 1923: the marriage license was not common, Common Law marriages were valid. All marriages were performed religiously or contractually and written in the records of the family Bible. In the mid-1800’s, certain states began allowing interracial marriages “miscegenation” as long as those marrying received a license. This is not to say it was a bad idea; for at the time, as those whom God hath joined together let no man put asunder, was being put asunder by men and women who wanted to keep their race pure.[4]
When you enter into a license, contract, with the government, you become their property to control and how others treat you, i.e. you no longer belong to God. While you cannot force a Church to perform the marriage, nor a community to accept mixed marriages, the government could demand the States allow these marriages, and for businesses not to discriminate, as this is an issue in commerce, (mammonism) of which governments control. If, it for the protection of the people, then the “higher powers”, are doing God’s work.
Not long after these licenses were issued, some states began requiring all people who marry to obtain a marriage license. In 1923, the Federal Government established the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act,[5] one law for all. By 1929, every state in the Union had adopted marriage license laws. Thereby, replacing God as the authority over the marriage, as one can only choose one master. Remember that annoying 1st amendment, in which they cannot pass any laws respecting or establishing a religion? Therefore, the Marriage License Act is by its nature, is without God.
Today the world has changed, being more acceptable of mixed marriages, why should we need the State’s permission to participate in something, which God instituted?[6]  (Trewhella, 2001). In addition, if you are not considered a different “race”, you are bearing false witness before God Almighty by obtaining a license meant for the commercial protection of miscegenation and committing perjury to the “higher powers”.
Having the authority to marry also gives the right to prohibit or destroy (divorce). This is why the first amendment gives no authority over religion.[7] The State cannot grant a “God-given right to marry” without violating the 1st, 9th, 10th, amendments, as well as State Constitutions. Therefore, the marriage license is not religious in any way, shape, or form; based on separation of Church and State. As long as the authorities are in alignment with the Common Law, i.e. the law of God, there is no conflict. However, the marriage license is based in false premise of “Races” fornicating; and is created by the State at the demand of the people: it is thus bound on earth[8] as a rejection of a God-centered marriage. When the laws of Man conflict with the supreme law of the land,[9] it is our duty to rebel against it,[10] or, at the very least, not participate in non-God centered activities.
A marriage license is made in the image of its creator, the government, i.e. State; which is an artificial entity; a fiction; a soulless creation; a corporation, i.e. “person.” Under Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 106.010 “Marriage is a civil contract entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age, who are otherwise capable, and solemnized in accordance with ORS…”. Males and females enter into a state of being in an artificial (soulless) entity, “entered into in person”: Governments are not to regulate people; they are to regulate commerce, businesses, and their own employees, thus they can issue a license to a fiction: your marriage: as you are Persons under the law.
Therefore, a marriage license issued by the State “Marriage is a civil contract entered into in person” is a rejection of God. The scripture is very clear that God is no “respecter of persons”:
·      2 Samuel 14:14: “For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again; neither doth God respect any person: yet doth he devise means, that his banished be not expelled from him”.
·      2 Chronicles 19:7: “Wherefore now let the fear of the LORD be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts”.
·      Acts 10:34: “Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons”.
·      Romans 2:11: “For there is no respect of persons with God”.
·      Galatians 2:6: “But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man’s person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me”.
·      Ephesians 6:9: “And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him”.
·      Colossians 3:25: “But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons”.
The scripture says that if we have respect of persons, we commit sin transgress God’s Law:
·      Leviticus 19:15: “Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor”.
·      Deuteronomy 1:17: “Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it”.
·      Deuteronomy 16:19: “Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous”.
·      Proverbs 24:23: “These things also belong to the wise. It is not good to have respect of persons in judgment”.
·      Proverbs 28:21: “To have respect of persons is not good: for for a piece of bread that man will transgress”.
The dictionary defines “respecter” as a person who has a high regard for someone or something. Here is an example of what is meant by respecter of person.
·      James 2:1-9: “My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come into your synagogue a man with a gold ring, in fine clothing, and there come in also a poor man in vile clothing; and ye have regard to him that weareth the fine clothing, and say, Sit thou here in a good place; and ye say to the poor man, Stand thou there, or sit under my footstool; do ye not make distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren; did not God choose them that are poor as to the world to be rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to them that love him? But ye have dishonored the poor man. Do not the rich oppress you, and themselves drag you before the judgment-seats? Do not they blaspheme the honorable name by which ye are called? Howbeit if ye fulfill the royal law, according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well: but if ye have respect of persons, ye commit sin, being convicted by the law as transgressors”.
Does God contradict himself? Let us look more closely:
·      Leviticus 19:15: Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor.
In other words, we are not to respect someone just because they are the president, or a police officer, or a banker, or a priest, or wealthy, these are the ‘persons of men’ We are to respect men because of what is in their hearts, not because of their image. Jesus did not accept the person of any, neither should we.
·      Luke 20:21: “And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thou the person of any, but teachest the way of God truly”. Person is not of God.
If the term “person” is synonymous with “man”, then there is a contradiction in the scripture, because throughout scripture, God specifically says he does respect man! For example:
·      “The LORD had respect unto Abel”: Genesis 4:4.
·      God had respect “upon the children of Israel”: Exodus 2:25.
·      I Am the Lord “For I will have respect unto you”, Leviticus 26:9.
·      And the LORD was gracious unto them, and had compassion on them, and had respect unto them” 2 Kings 13:23.
·      God has “respect unto the lowly”: Psalms 138:6.
·      It is written, “Honor all men”: 1 Peter 1:17.
Therefore, “person” and “man” is not the same. However, in the same breath, Paul tells the first century believers to hold Timothy in honor: Philippians 2:29. Obviously, “persons” and “men” cannot be synonymous terms. As “Person” can be either the poor, lowly, or the mighty, it would have to be in conjunction with mammon, wealth. Corporations are created for the purpose commerce for profit. Profit is charging excess of the value. Persons of wealth tend to oppress men, James 2:5-5 “Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?”
Therefore, if the Government grants the license, you claim the State owns you. You reject God being a part of your marriage, as you become “person” in a civil marriage. Government is about commerce, Mammon, wealth; God is about Love: How many masters can you serve? Since I have been given power of attorney to do all acts in the name of my King,[11] I therefore can create my own marriage certificate/license, either as officiator or Groom, and the “higher powers” (courts) have supported this. As long as it is in line with the Common Law, it is valid.
The courts view both sides. If you involved in commerce for profit, have rejected God, embraced mammon, subject yourself to man’s law, entered into a contract with the government (marriage license), you are a “person”. Just as the State-code says: entered into in person by males and females: not men and women. As all animals, monsters, creatures etc… are separated into male and female terminology. Be men and women that have God’s respect.
You not only marry your spouse with a state issued marriage license, you also marry the state.[12] This is proven in Ohio, published by the Ohio Bar association- the subtitle “Marriage Vows” states, “Actually, when you repeat your marriage vows you enter into a legal contract. There are three parties to that contract. 1.You; 2. Your husband or wife; 3. The State of Ohio.” Whose has not heard “by the power invested into me by the State of…? I now pronounce you husband and wife” (Trewhella, 2001).
Thus, the government has authority over its creations, persons, or corporations, as it involves commerce, and the fruit (profit) of the corporation; this is where the state gets authority over your children (fruit or profit of the government created fiction). You do not like what the school teaches, what they are exposed to, what they may eat or do, “your marriage license and their birth certificates” give the state the authority to do as they will, even that which is against your beliefs; for they are your masters[13] (Trewhella, 2001). This is not done in Heaven, it should not be done on Earth, and this is not the Will of the Father.[14]If you were made free, by your death with Christ, from the rules of the world, why do you put yourselves under the authority of orders” (Ryrie, 1986).[15] Why is it illegal to have a God-centered marriage? Is the government at war with God? Who side are you on? If you do what the world does, what sets you apart as being different, one of God’s children?
When would a license be legitimate? Do I have the right to copy what others create for profit? Mickey Mouse is a well-known fictional character; could I copy the image and sell it to others without permission from the owner or one who has the copyrights? I would need permission from Disney, a license, to sell, create, or display these images for profit. United States regulates commerce; they can and will enforce, and protect copyrights laws. Disney may have a set of requirements before granting such a license; they may want a straight fee, a percentage of the profits, or some other arrangement. None-the-less, Disney, who is the owner of the images, needs to grant the license. Who is your master?
God intended daughters to have their father’s blessing (or that of a close male family member) regarding whom they married. Daughters were to be given in marriage by their fathers.[16] We have a vestige of this in our culture today: in that the father takes his daughter to the front of the altar and the minister asks, “Who gives this woman to be married to this man?” This use to be a requirement from time immemorial, however, now it is just a motion we go through, if we do that much: some will elope; traditions lost. The marriage license allows the government to give permission, as master, parent, and owner, removing God-given parental authority.
I do not accept that the State has the ability to marry, or the right to determine anyone’s ability to marry anyone, or perform such activity. Where in the constitutions have the people given the government the ability to perform marriages of any kind? Where in the Constitutions have the people been denied the ability to perform marriages without the State’s approval? If they have the authority, and you are to blindly obey the authority, they can choose all aspects of whom and reasons for anyone to marry anyone of their choosing. As for me, God comes first regardless; anything repugnant to the Common Law is invalid. Anyone claiming authority to perform a marriage by the State is committing an act of treason to the constitution, and at WAR with God.
As the Supreme Court has invalidated a key part of voting rights act of the Civil rights era stating, “For a half century, a concerted effort has been made to end racial discrimination in voting. Thanks to the Voting Rights Act, progress once the subject of a dream has been achieved and continues to be made” (Liptak, 2013). Based on that and that the marriage license was in response to different “races” being married, to live in peace, raise a family; and that most modern countries around the world recognize the validity of different “races” legally being married; the marriage license should also be invalidated, if not by the Supreme Court, then by all Christians, or any religion, that believes God is the center of their lives. All anyone would need to do is live together as husband and wife: holy obedience to the law and purpose of God, with the honest intention of being husband and wife so long as they both shall live, and join her estate with his (take his last name); this will constitute them lawfully husband and wife, and create a valid marriage under Common Law, i.e. The law of God. Please understand that ceremonies are important, the witnesses, best man, bridesmaids etc. just the icing on the cake but, they are only secondary to what is needed in a lawful marriage.
Given the fact that states have legalized one-gender marriages and many do not see this as being valid, “If a man and a man marry with a State marriage license, and a man and woman marry without a State marriage license (Common Law marriage); who is really married? In reality, this contention that people are not married unless they obtain a marriage license simply reveals how Statist[17] we are in our awareness, how mammonism is in control. It is the way of the world.
We need to think biblically. We record the marriage in the Family Bible. What is recorded in a Family Bible will stand up as legal evidence in any court of law in America (Trewhella, 2001).[18] If you want to keep marriage sacred, take away the authority of the State to marry others, or at the very least, deny your participation in the marriage license as a Citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven. You cannot control what others do, but you can take responsibility for your actions. The State or government should not do marriage itself, as governments are part of the World,[19] of which they have no authority over God. The government regulates commerce, and charges a fee for the privilege of certain benefits. Maximum of Law: Marriages ought to be free,[20] (Black, 1891) and between a man and a woman.
What do one-gender marriage couples want? The ability to inherit when a partner dies, to make critical decisions for their partner, and to receive benefits; they can already adopt and raise children. Give it to them; let them have the marriage license, it is the States business of which can be regulated and protect the couples. We are not to judge, we are not to condemn.[21] If we start to judge one-gender marriage and/or imprison them, then we must also judge, arrest, and imprison, divorced couples, fornicators, those that lust within their hearts over another, and the list goes on. Then we must wrap women up in burkas and prevent women from having or holding any public employment or office as to prevent temptation when the eyes of men are upon them.
On the other hand, we can be responsible for our choices, thoughts, and actions. We keep marriage sacred, based on man, woman, and God. This by no means is a call to cause injury or to harass anyone;[22] one-gender married or not, they are still our neighbors,[23] and in the image of God, his children, we therefore must love them and treat them as we must do anyone, with kindness and love. The State will validate one-gender marriages, as they ought to do, as all men are created equal and they cannot discriminate based on sexual orientation; people have the unalienable right to pursue happiness:[24] one gender marriages ought to be done with a State marriage license.
The government can alter its laws at any time; we can now divorce for any reason; often the judgment is for the obvious immoral party. If the marriage license were redefined to only protect marriages involved in commerce, then there would be little conflict. If there were no races, or if people were to hold onto the “loving thy neighbor” commandment, there would be no need of a marriage license at all. Racism divides the house. Therefore, the idea of Racism is immoral as it has emotional power to create a reaction of great harm, especially to ones sprit, respect for family, and towards God. In other words, stand up for God center marriages;[25] it is the way of the Citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven.

[1] 2 Corinthians 12:21 lest my God should humble me as to you when I come again, and that I shall grieve over many of those who have sinned before, and have not repented as to the uncleanness and fornication and licentiousness which they have practiced: Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, licentiousness.
[2] 27 CFR § 72.11: Crimes are commercial, you are a debtor/sinner, you must pay your debt, or someone else pays it.
[3] United States Constitution; Article I, Section 8 paragraph 3: The Congress shall have Power; To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.
[4] Inbreeding: breed from closely related people, esp. over many generations:
[5] Exodus 9:1 Thus saith Jehovah, the God of the Hebrews, Let my people go, that they may serve me.
[6] Genesis 2:18 And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.
[7] United States Constitution: 1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
[8] Matthew 18: Verily I say unto you, what things soever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and what things soever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
[9] “Law of the Land” means “The Common Law.” Taylor vs. Porter., 4 Hill140, 146. & State vs. Simon.,2 Spears 761, 767.
[10] “The Constitution of these United States is the supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137
[11] Colossians 3:17 And whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him; John 14:13-14 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do; John 16 23-24 And in that day ye shall ask me no question. Verily, verily, I say unto you, if ye shall ask anything of the Father, he will give it you in my name. Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be made full.
[12] Matthew 18:18 Verily I say unto you, what things soever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and what things soever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
[13] Exodus 9:13 Thus saith Jehovah, the God of the Hebrews, Let my people go, that they may serve me.
[14] Matthew 6:10 Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth.
[15] Colossians 2:20
[16] Deuteronomy 22:16 and the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her; Exodus 22:17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins; I Corinthians 7:38 38 So then both he that giveth his own virgin daughter in marriage doeth well; and he that giveth her not in marriage shall do better.
[17] Define as a political system in which the state has substantial centralized control over social and economic affairs.
[18] United States Constitution: 1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
[19] Exodus 10:3 Thus saith Jehovah, the God of the Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? Let my people go, that they may serve me.
[20] “No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.” Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105
[21] Luke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.
[22] Luke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:
[23] Mark 12: 28-31 What commandment is the first of all? Jesus answered, The first is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God, the Lord is one: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength. The second is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.
[24] “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation, which would abrogate them.” Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425
[25] Matthew 6:10 Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on earth.

No comments:

Post a Comment