Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The amendment opens with, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
Quote:
they believe the phrase “citizens of the United States” overrode state citizenship and revoked individual rights. As a result, sovereign citizens believe, the federal government now has the power to grant privileges through contracts such as marriage and driver’s licenses, gun permits and property codes.
Quote:
To abolish the contractual relationship with the federal corporation or business corporations, many sovereigns will renounce their affiliation with Section 1 of the 14th Amendment with a document filed in a county clerk’s office.
Sovereign citizens renounce first sentence of 14th Amendment
Anyone that has tried this redemption movement has ended up in jail or keeps getting harassed by the FBI. You can never be a free person if you don't own property that you have allodial title to. No one absolutely owns their property in this country. I spoke with jetgraphics about this since he's the one pushing the redemption thing on this forum, and came to the conclusion that it will never work unless you own a domicile, as opposed to a residence.
We have a feudal system of property where instead, like in Canada or the UK, the land is all owned by the British Crown, aka the British Sovereign and her representatives. All people that live on her land are called tenants/residents. In the U.S., the government owns all the land, and the government grants us our property rights.
And how can you own land outright, when the US Constitution explicitly states that all land cannot be taken without just compensation? Ergo, eminent domain is in the Constitution.
My conclusion is having researched this fully, and read those so-called redemption manuals and other things, is that the "sovereign citizen" (technically, it's an oxymoron because a citizen is a subject, not a sovereign) is a load of BS because you can't have something we never had.
Sovereign citizens renounce first sentence of 14th Amendment
All they had to do was come right out and say that Americans who were black, and were born in this country, were just as much a US citizen as a white man born in this country. Instead, they danced around it with vague and uncertain terms, and left room for mischief. We need to stop allowing lawyers from writing these government documents.
All they had to do was come right out and say that Americans who were black, and were born in this country, were just as much a US citizen as a white man born in this country.
Because they had no intention of limiting that right to only black or white Americans.
Quote:
We need to stop allowing lawyers from writing these government documents.
Does that include the Framers, most of whom were lawyers?
Because they had no intention of limiting that right to only black or white Americans.
Yes, the banks certainly had a say in it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
