 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Sacred may be better than Solemn for the concept of referring to a method of recording honorable status in driving forward from a specific principle.
If the specific principle that is honorably driving action is moral then it is beyond the individual human entity. In other words the source of the power is whatever power created human beings. Call it the power behind creation scientifically or religiously, it is the same thing so long as it is not the opposite principle knowable as Might makes Right, where a man (or woman, or group) rules other men (mankind), against the knowledge, or against the will, or against disagreement, or against consent concerning said rulings by said Might makes Right RULERS.
1.
Law based upon the power of the creator (God or ectropy or genetics or whatever isn't Might makes Right)
2.
Crime made legal, or Might (lies, threats, aggressive violence) making "Right"
A sacred oath for a scientist compared to a solemn oath for a scientist can be compared to a sacred oath for a God fearing (See Proverbs 8) Christian or religious human being, compared to a solemn oath among a band of brothers, or a case of honor among thieves.
In other words the concept is equal power governing all mankind or power exerted by an exclusive membership of some people over other people.
1. Equity/Liberty/prosperity/for posterity
2. Iniquity/slavery/misery/for extinction
So the solemn oath includes (historically, presently, and well understood as a good idea on into the future) a sacred object from which the driving principle is authorizing further human action.
Under any scrutiny or onfusion as to who wanders off the path of equity, any claims of anyone in error, or in repugnance to the guiding principle, is traced back, each step of the way, back to the source of authority that launches said actions intended to reach said goals.
Solemn oaths, as a possible case of incapacity to remember what was said during the solemn oath, or a possible cause of incapacity to remember what the words written in the oath meant, pertained to, or was, in FACT, the guiding principle launching further actions to reach a nebulous, misunderstood, goal: from the beginning, can compare to a Sacred Oath made while holding the object that records the unmistakable principle behind the Sacred Oath which then authorizes followed orders of actions as they become actions in time.
If the point of origin is nebulous then any mistakes along the way are nearly certain to be mistakes because on error compounded upon another error removes the power of removing errors. Lies work this way, so this should not be difficult to see.
A person asks for a measure needed to make a board while building a house. Anther person says it is 25 units exactly. The board is cut and it is much too short. I was using metric, one says, while the other says I was using the standard foot measure. Now, listen, here is where the principle comes in, as both agree to cut the short board one more time, so as to make the short board fit.
If the board is not long enough to fit, it makes no sense to keep cutting more wood off of the board that is already too short.
Another 3 competitive ways to look at the idea of having a Sacred object, and not simply a solemn oath, is to see how two phrases in English clarify the reasoning for doing things this way.
1.
Take me to your leader
2.
The buck stops here
3.
Follow the money
To me The Declaration of Independence offers me a Sacred Object to base, by way of objective principle, the leadership, the source of authority, where the buck stops, and where following all the subsequent currency that may be produced from that principled authority is traceable back to that original point of production, that foundation.
I pledge a sacred Oath on that sacred object because that is the point at which I begin a journey to defend the human species from self destruction as some human beings are launching their actions based upon pure greed, pure self preserving actions whereby their desires are purchased by stealing the souls of many innocent victims.
Later on, in any case of error, on my own discovery of all the evidence of my own deeds, or with the help of any other person challenging my deeds driven by my founding principle, there can be a step by step (bread crumbs) trail back to that source, that Sacred Oath, and that object I hold as the Sacred Object present, referred to, as being the foundation from which all subsequent actions were justified, authorized, or enabled.
Take me to your leader, and I can refer to that Sacred Object. That is my leader. I am not led by any man, or woman. I am led by the power of creation. The power of creation is Sacred, all powerful, and it was that source of power behind the construction of that Sacred document, that Declaration of Independence, and it was what I held when I made my Sacred Oath, without any question, without any room for error, as that principle drove me on the path I took after making my Sacred Oath.
Well why did you go to the Bar and drink too much on the night of the 17th, on and on?
That is my personal business, not yours.
Well why did you write that Notice and Demand and transfer that document with that seal on it to the person having this name at this office in this court building on this date?
That can be traced back precisely to my Oath taken with this Sacred Object in my hand at the time of my Oath. Let there be no mistake as to why I was authorized to preform that duty as I see it.
Declaration of Duty
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
The person who was in the office was asked to provide evidence of any oath of any kind concerning the actions that person had made, or failed to make, while they were supposedly authorized by that office.
Next are words that I think aught to be understood concerning an error I made during the Monday call, that I hope will be published on the National Liberty Alliance Web Page in due order.
I had spoken words indicating that defenders of Liberty can "sic" the people I call Legal Criminals upon each other, in so many words, and I want to explain that in greater detail, in my defense.
I do not mean to say that my intention is to harm anyone. My error was to fail to acknowledge an offer of remedy in any case of dealing with anyone, so as to offer, and the receive, consent.
A case I was eluding to had to do with someone in an office whereby the person in a office obstructs the proceedings that are authorized by the laws that created the office where the person is obstructing proceedings.
The idea is that their position at that point is to decide which side they are going to consent to be on. If they desire to be among their fellow usurpers of Liberty, then they will be chewed up in that meat grinder by their fellow conspirators; hence my wording of "sic" as in "sic the dogs of war upon them," but the meaning is not what may first appear on the surface.
The dogs of Aggressive War for Profit is at stake for those who have invested in it.
The defenders merely offer a merciful way out, and at that point the receivers of the offer are able to consent to that offer offered at that time, as an offer authorized by Sacred Oath to a cause, well enough explained in a Sacred document, and if there is no consent, then the person in question will probably be a liability from that point on in the criminal Cabal chosen to be the source of that person's authority.
Here is where it may be a good idea to understand the implications of Moto Proprio.
The former "leaders of the free world" have lost their power of authority, which was based upon lies in the first place, but now the point has reached at which even among their own, there are now confessions of having done terrible wrongs.
Mammon, it seems, is self-destructing.
The concept of Sacred Oaths among Friends of Liberty is such that we prefer to get off that Long Black Train, in no uncertain terms.