The Mental Militia Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Murbury vs Madison  (Read 768 times)

FDD

  • Big Dog
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2420
  • Welcome to Wyoming, Conceder everyone armed
Murbury vs Madison
« on: January 31, 2020, 03:38:25 pm »

All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.

no hate speech, 1st amendment

all gun laws, 2nd amendment

all asset forfeiture, 4th amendment     

just to name a few
Logged
Nobody needs an AR-15
Nobody needs a whiny little bitch ether, yet here you are

If we want our grandchildren to be able to give thanks for being Americans, we'll need to.....start steering a course away from government control of our lives-and start moving back toward greater personal responsibility.   Ed Feulner

I think, therefore I am not a progressive liberal socialist marxist democrat

That's WY

mouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7576
Re: Murbury vs Madison
« Reply #1 on: January 31, 2020, 04:01:16 pm »

So it established judicial review, but it's not being applied.  This is all fine in theory but it's not being done.
Logged

securitysix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5874
  • Self Proclaimed Champion Thread Derailer
Re: Murbury vs Madison
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2020, 05:22:21 pm »

All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.

no hate speech, 1st amendment

all gun laws, 2nd amendment

all asset forfeiture, 4th amendment     

just to name a few

Correct.

So it established judicial review, but it's not being applied.  This is all fine in theory but it's not being done.

Also correct.
Logged
"That's what governments are for; get in a man's way." - Malcom Reynolds

"This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer." - Will Rogers

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4918
  • TMM
Re: Murbury vs Madison
« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2020, 09:59:45 pm »

All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.

no hate speech, 1st amendment

all gun laws, 2nd amendment

all asset forfeiture, 4th amendment     

just to name a few

Correct.

So it established judicial review, but it's not being applied.  This is all fine in theory but it's not being done.
Also correct.

And I agree on all counts. Today's government is so far off base that an underhand softball lob could easily throw it out with time to spare.  Example -- I looked at Article One, Section Eight to see where I might find the enumerated power, authority, and duty for the Federal government to involve itself in the education of children within the several States in the compact. Conclusion I've drawn so far is that there is no such authorization, enumerated power, or duty for Fedgov to tamper in the education of our children. The damned government was not created to do that, nor to do a zillion other things it's obsessed with doing.

A good question would be for anyone to come up with any perceived authority, enumerated power, and/or duty for the Federal government to own our bodies.  With this bullshit Trump is starting about a medical martial law type of cure for the coronavirus thingy, you watch and see if the damned government doesn't conclude that for the good of all of us we must be forced to accept vaccinations with an experimental coronavirus shot. In other words, the Fedgov is about to test the waters once again to see if we the people will allow our own damn government to actually own our bodies.

Salute!
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

mouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7576
Re: Murbury vs Madison
« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2020, 05:20:11 pm »

All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.

no hate speech, 1st amendment

all gun laws, 2nd amendment

all asset forfeiture, 4th amendment     

just to name a few

Correct.

So it established judicial review, but it's not being applied.  This is all fine in theory but it's not being done.
Also correct.

A good question would be for anyone to come up with any perceived authority, enumerated power, and/or duty for the Federal government to own our bodies.  With this bullshit Trump is starting about a medical martial law type of cure for the coronavirus thingy, you watch and see if the damned government doesn't conclude that for the good of all of us we must be forced to accept vaccinations with an experimental coronavirus shot. In other words, the Fedgov is about to test the waters once again to see if we the people will allow our own damn government to actually own our bodies.

Salute!

The right to "refuse medical treatment" still exists.  Mandatory vaccinations still mean "medical treatment".  I don't know how states that make vaccination compulsory get round this.  People DO "own their bodies", that is in the constitution.

"Coronavirus" is a lot of hype, the overreaction is designed to get people to panic and accept all sorts of ridiculous draconian measures.  Look at the figures for "swine 'flu'" in 2009/10.  It wasn't hyped so much because Obama was president and no one wanted to criticise anything he did (or did not do), but ….

Before that there was the "bird 'flu'" (no panic buying of toilet paper with this one either ….. though "toilet paper" - I really don't know why toilet paper and not - say - bread.

People today seem to be in a constant state of panic:  "Coronavirus", "global warming", "help!  The sky is falling", people do not seem to think.
Logged

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4918
  • TMM
Re: Murbury vs Madison
« Reply #5 on: March 16, 2020, 12:53:58 am »

The right to "refuse medical treatment" still exists.  Mandatory vaccinations still mean "medical treatment".  I don't know how states that make vaccination compulsory get round this.  People DO "own their bodies", that is in the constitution.

Well, yes, mouse. Our "Unalienable Rights" do "exist", but only if we exercise them. By not standing up for their rights (i.e., using those rights openly and freely on a regular basis) people sort of unconsciously betray their ownership of those rights. The purpose of "government" is "to govern". The more "permission" a society grants to its government, the more momentum their government develops "to better serve" the governed. These idiot State legislatures which have made it "legal" for their damned government to force people to take vaccines are completely out of their minds when it comes to honoring their oaths to the people who pay them, and are in denial of the very language in their respective State constitutions, not to mention the Constitution of the compact between all States. 
And yet the people in those States have not risen up and put the offending legislators into their proper prison cells for usurping the rights of the people. That, in and of itself, is a failure to stand for their rights. And that is an indictment on the apathy which TV and the New York media and government proclamation has produced. It's disgusting to see how low society has fallen, how sadly missing is any sign of self-respect. Here is a quote from an old classic which actually sums up the situation very nicely, if any reader is sharp enough to follow the author's line of thinking and relate well to the words chosen to express what we're mulling over here today.

Quote

“Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions; they want to be led, and they wish to remain free: as they cannot destroy either one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large that holds the end of his chain.
By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master, and then relapse into it again. A great many persons at the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience.”  ~ Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America


In a way, mouse, it's a matter of "who is minding our minds".  ;)
If any Mental Militian is not minding his/her mind, one can bet that someone else is. We may ask, having given that sentence some thought, if the CIA, FBI, NRO, DIA, ATF, IRS, DEA, and the whole host of infectuous agencies and departments which constitute our beloved "government", and the Corporate Dynasty's infusoria, the central banking system, and the military-industrial complex which keeps Wall Street's bubble afloat, and others too numerous to mention here --- we may ask if any and/or all of those mentioned and un-mentioned have any particular interest in minding our minds, the individual minds of the governed? I'd say that it is safe to bet one's bottom dollar that every damned one of them is keenly interested in the perception of the individual mind, as well as the perception of the "Group Mind" (as Edward Bernays dubbed it, or the "collective consciousness" as defined by Dr. Carl Jung).
It's called, in short, "Mind Control". And that is what is behind the reality you've described, the reality in which we still have the right of medical refusal and we still have the right to full self-ownership. If the illusion of "authority" were stripped from the power of the government, the people would do as Thomse Jefferson recommended and throw this damned-by-God government away and replace it with something useful. Remember?

Quote
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

How interesting, that such verbiage is permanently on the record in this nation's founding legal documents, and yet is totally over-looked by the masses, who seem to be quite happy in their ignorance, comfortable in their slavery, conveniently pleased and entertained in the selling of their souls to some silly-assed man-made fiction called "government".

Salute!
Elias
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."
Pages: [1]   Go Up