Oath of Office and Affirmations.

In the Constitution of the United States, there is a clause that says "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." (Article VI, paragraph 3)

According to the dictionary, an Oath is:

"Any type of attestation by which an individual signifies that he or she is bound in conscience to perform a particular act truthfully and faithfully; a solemn declaration of truth or obligation.

An individual's appeal to God to witness the truth of what he or she is saying or a pledge to do something enforced by the individual's responsibility to answer to God.

Similarly an affirmation is a solemn and formal declaration that a statement is true; however, an affirmation includes no reference to God so it can be made by someone who does not believe in God or by an individual who has conscientious objections against swearing to God. Provisions in state statutes or constitutions ordinarily allow affirmations to be made as alternatives to oaths.

In order for an oath to be legally effective, it must be administered by a public official. The law creating each public office and describing the duties of the official ordinarily indicates who is authorized to administer the oath of office. A spoken oath is generally sufficient; however, a written and signed oath can be required by law."

And the Oath they must take is: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God." (This is the Congressional Oath of Office. Different positions require different wording, but the idea is the same.)

Everyone that swears an oath (or affirmation) swore to uphold the Constitution. They didn't swear to uphold the laws that are written, but to uphold the Constitution. That means in making the law, the enforcement of that law, and how that law is used in Court.

When someone breaks, or violates their Oath, there are strong and serious consequences for that.

A Congressperson can be removed from office, a lawyer dis-barred, and a Judge pulled from his/her bench and dis-barred as well as all of their cases being suspect.

The Code in each State has different punishments for violating the Oath of Office for State Government workers. But the US Code is universal enough to be shown here.

5 US 7731 Section 8(5) says: "Knowing membership with the specific intent of furthering the aims of, or adherence to and active participation in, any foreign or domestic organization, association, movement, group, or combination of persons (hereinafter referred to as organizations) which unlawfully advocates or practices the commission of acts of force or violence to prevent others from exercising their rights under the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State, or which seeks to overthrow the Government of the United States or any State or subdivision thereof by unlawful means."

So when anyone (Congress, Judges, Lawyers, etc.) helps to deprive citizens of their rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States through force, or coercion, is violating not only their Oath of Office, but the US Code as well. If they are waging war on the Constitution by their actions, they are violating this section as well.

The punishment for Congress for waging war on the Constitution (and thus the US Government) is found in a different section.

18 U.S.C. § 1918 says: "Whoever violates the provision of section 7311 of title 5 that an individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia." (The conditions of who this applies to can be read at the link given.)

And another consequence for violating 7731 is a Civil Suit under 1983 law.

When an Unconstitutional law is passed by Congress, upheld in court by the Judges and the Lawyers, the consequences for those actions are fairly strong. Lawyers are dis-barred, Judges impeached, and Congress people are removed from office and never allowed to hold office again.

Charges of Oath of Office are a serious thing. And not to be brought about without some serious facts to back it up.

And lastly, please remember, I am not a Lawyer. This is not legal advice, but merely my understanding of things that I found in the Constitution. If you wish to use this information, please consult a Lawyer.

Stigma- The Antithesis of Liberty

stig·ma

(stĭg'mə)

1. A mark or token of infamy, disgrace, or reproach: "Party affiliation has never been more casual . . . The stigmata of decay are everywhere" (Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.) See Synonyms at stain.

2. Archaic A mark burned into the skin of a criminal or slave; a brand.

Token of Infamy, Disgrace, Reproach, a Brand.

All of these are tools to keep the "criminal" from interacting with the rest of society. Criminals are a hated group of society, but one group of criminals brings out the animalistic nature of humans.

Sex Offenders.

Stigma is so heavily attached to sex offenders that a mere accusation is enough to raise the hackles of most people.

Why is this important? Stigma removes Liberty.

lib·er·ty  /ˈlɪbərti/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [lib-er-tee]

1 :the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice


"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." --Declaration of Independence


Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are endowed by our Creator. That means that they cannot be taken away.

When Stigma is present, Liberty cannot exist.

To argue that Stigma is removing Liberty, you must meet the "Stigma Plus" rule. More than just mere reputation must be lost with the Stigma. Such as employment or property of some sort.

Once you meet that requirement, you have proven that Liberty is lost due to Stigma. At that point, suits under 1983 and the 14th Amendment become applicable.

Stigma is created by the lies told. A majority of sex offenders do not recidivate. The numbers that do, float between 3-5% depending on the study. The general public feels that sex offenders are monsters that if given a chance, will do the unthinkable again.

The numbers don't lie.

Yet Stigma still remains.

Peonage, A form of Slavery

A page from LectLaw:

"INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE & PEONAGE - a condition of compulsory service or labor performed by one person, against his will, for the benefit of another person due to force, threats, intimidation or other similar means of coercion and compulsion directed against him.

In considering whether service or labor was performed by someone against his will or involuntarily, it makes no difference that the person may have initially agreed, voluntarily, to render the service or perform the work. If a person willingly begins work but later desires to withdraw and is then forced to remain and perform work against his will, his service becomes involuntary. Also, whether a person is paid a salary or a wage is not determinative of the question as to whether that person has been held in involuntary servitude. In other words, if a person is forced to labor against his will, his service is involuntary even though he is paid for his work.

However, it is necessary to prove that the person knowingly and willfully took action, by way of force, threats, intimidation or other form of coercion, causing the victim to reasonably believe that he had no way to avoid continued service, that he was confronted by the existence of a superior and overpowering authority, constantly threatening to the extent that his will was completely subjugated.

Title 18, U.S.C., Sec. 1584, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to willfully hold another person in involuntary servitude.

A person can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

First: That the person held the victim in a condition of 'involuntary servitude';

Second: That such holding was for a 'term,'; and

Third: That the person acted knowingly and willfully.

It must be shown that a person held to involuntary servitude was so held for a 'term.' It is not necessary, however, that any specific period of time be proved so long as the 'term' of the involuntary service was not wholly insubstantial or insignificant.

Title 18, U.S.C., Sec. 1581(a) is the peonage law cited in the indictment.

The specific facts which must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in order to establish the offense of peonage include each and all of the three specific factual elements constituting involuntary servitude as previously stated and explained in these instructions, plus a fourth specific fact; namely, that the involuntary servitude was compelled by the person in order to satisfy a real or imagined debt regardless of amount. "

This was the entire page on Peonage from LectLaw. I copied it here, because to have paraphrased it would have brought an injustice to this work.


How is peonage important to offenders you might ask? Simple.

When an offender is sentenced, they sign their name on the "guilty" line and form a contract with the State. When that sentence is over, the offenders debt to that state is complete. But what happens when the state takes a portion of that "contract" and continually changes it, thus changing the contract.

The offender then no longer has the ability to complete the contract, and, is forced to do things not previously agreed upon.

Also, if this wasn't disclosed to the offender at the time of signing (the ever changing nature of the contract that is), the contract becomes null and void.

Contract Law states:

"Full Disclosure n. the need in business transactions to tell the "whole truth" about any matter which the other party should know in deciding to buy or contract. In real estate sales in many states there is a full disclosure form which must be filled out and signed under penalty of perjury for knowingly falsifying or concealing any significant fact."

If the Court did not fully disclose the nature of your sentence to you, and all the definitions of each portion of your sentencing, then that contract can be viewed as void. (Contract law would be tough to go into and make it easy to understand. Do a word search for Unconscionable.)

And for those that think that sentencing (plea bargains) are not contracts, please read this.

So, if your contract is now null and void, but you have no recourse, you are now suffering from peonage. Why? Because if you don't conform to the new contract, you will be thrown in jail. Coercion. Did the Legislators "knowingly" make a new law to make things tougher for you?

I'll leave that one for you to decide.

Is There "Corruption of Blood" Working in America?

"The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person." --Article 1, Section 3 US Constitution

"In English law, the result of attainder, in that the attainted person lost all rights to inherit land or other hereditaments from an ancestor, to retain possession of such property and to transfer any property rights to anyone, including heirs, by virtue of his or her conviction for treason or a felony punishable by death, because the law considered the person's blood tainted by the crime.

Attainder and the consequent corruption of the blood were abolished by English statutes and are virtually unknown in the United States." --Answers.com

"...Because the Law considered the person's blood tainted by the crime." This phrase can be used on any convicted Felon. The Bureau of Justice Statistics states that as of 2007, one in thirty-one adults are on probation, parole, or in prison.

If the Law considers your "blood" tainted because of your crime, then that taint will effect your children and family as well. These people are the "heirs" to whatever potential you may have had. Does this excuse a crime committed? No.

Once a sentence has run it's course, the person is supposed to return to full citizen status. Today, stigma is attached to being a Felon. This stigma reduces your ability to find employment, a home, and build a positive life. The stigma (taint) of your crime has now turned you into a "second class citizen."

Your family, they will struggle with this for the rest of their lives. Your children will be affected by this through their most impressionable years.

Treason used to be the only crime that Corruption of Blood used to be an after effect of. Now, anything classified as a felony will attaint you with Corruption of Blood.

This stigma now removes many of the rights you were given under the Constitution of the United States of America. No longer are you allowed to vote, own a gun, or be eligible to serve this country in the Military. All of these rights (or their removal) will effect your family.

Collateral Damage is now acceptable in the United States. People say "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime." But I would challenge anyone out there to find me someone that knew what the social stigma would be before his sentencing. The true punishment doesn't become apparent until long after your sentence has run it's course.

Collateral Damage is a polite way of saying that your family is under Corruption of Blood.

Don't like it, then speak up to your legislators.

The Eulogy of The United States of America

In the beginning, The United States of America was a bastion of hope. In her borders, people were given the chance to be free of oppressive governments. Free to believe and worship as their souls dictated.

The Founding Fathers wrote up her indoctrination articles. In them, they hammered out the ideas, and the concepts that would shape and mold this young Nation into a beacon to the world.

Each time they met at a Constitutional Conference, prayer was given. Not to say that the Christian Faith that they held was to be the universal religion, but to show that these men believed in a higher power than themselves.

Through this prayer, our Constitution was born.

With this Constitution, our Nation was given life. This life was to offer the people of the world a chance to say "Enough." To this end, we opened our borders to anyone that wanted Freedom. And this freedom was stamped out in our Bill of Rights. That "All Men were Created Equal!" From these "men," a few were chosen to be our voice. Chosen to speak on our behalf.

Congress was called to represent the people. They were to be "of the people, by they people, and for the people." These Congresspeople knew their responsibilities, and took them seriously.

Commerce was established. Ideas were brought forth. And shortly after her inception, America was a force to be reckoned with.

We accepted other nations as they were, but we showed through our efforts that certain behaviors would not be tolerated. We went to War on numerous occasions.

Through our union with our old brethren, we were able to defeat the threat from the East, as well as the threat from Europe. We abhorred the ideals set forth by Germany's leadership. We set out to right the wrongs committed by them.

No more would we allow men and women to be denied their "unalienable rights" in this world. The United Nations, using ideals from our nation, drafted The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

We even stopped the segregation that was happening within our own borders. We opened the minds of our own citizens to stop the hatred. Our people would be free, and equal!

Through our struggles to enlighten, we forced ourselves to continue to practice these ideals around the globe. Attempting to bring peace to all nations.

America has been a great nation to call home.

But, like in all things human; greed, complacency, apathy, and struggles for power ended up corrupting those that were supposed to be "for the people."

We quietly allowed our rights to be removed. Our Liberty was given up. The ideal that to remove someones rights was to also remove our own was gone. Still, the greed that consumed those in power continued to grow. The poison was leeching into the very minds of the backbone of our nation.

Justice no longer meant what it was spelled out to mean. Now, the more money you had, the more "justice" you received. In the end, her peoples were no longer "innocent until proven guilty," but "guilty until proven innocent."

Soon, the people no longer mattered in their opinions. Those in power began to tell the people, through the media, what they would think.

In the end, the very safeguards built into the Constitution, were utterly ignored. To the point that men ordained to the highest office were quoted as saying that our Constitution was but a "G.D. piece of paper!"

The ideals, the sacredness of the trust given, and the faith of the people were let down. No longer did a person have to be a natural born citizen to become the Nations President.

This President has ushered in a new Nation. This new nation no longer believes in the Republic she once was. This new nation breathes Socialism into her peoples.

Dead are the old ways. Dead is the Constitution. Dead are the Scales of Justice. The Great Nation known as The United States of America has finally fallen.

Fallen because of an attack from within.

Regulatory Laws on Personal Statutes

Regulatory Laws are known as Administrative Laws.

Statutory Laws are laws established by an act of Legislature.

The most interesting form of statutes are those called Personal Statutes.

A personal statute is something that one is assumed to "carry with him wherever he goes." Being a sex offender creates that personal statute. Sex offenders are told where they can live, who gets to know their personal business, if they can congregate, and if they have any rights. These statutes are all based off of a crime committed.

Sex Offender Laws are also considered "regulatory" in Smith v. Doe. The argument here was that the statutes were not illegal because they were "regulatory" and not "punitive." They merely wanted (their intent) to control the sex offenders and not punish them. Punishing them would have been Double Jeopardy. But, regulating their lives wasn't considered to be punishment. If they broke from the statute, then they were brought up on new charges.

The punishment only comes from the deviation from the regulation, and not from the regulation itself.

But, there is a problem with their thinking. Putting a personal statute on someone based on their criminal history creates a Bill of Pains and Penalties. Not only that, but the Supreme Court ruled that "...the constitutional prohibition may not be evaded by giving a civil form to a measure that is essentially criminal."

Creating a "regulatory" statute that has a punitive effect (even if the intent is to merely regulate) based off of a crime committed is wholly unconstitutional. Creating a regulation of a "personal statute" nature creates a "cruel and unusual" punishment aspect, as well as violating Double Jeopardy issues.

Sex Offender Laws, whether seen as Regulatory or Punitive, are still Unconstitutional.

And there are other Registries being made every day off of the success of the Sex Offender Registry.

Time Served. Or Is It?

Time Served. Or Is It?

Recently, I was reading an article titled "Paying a Debt to Society - Then What?" and couldn't help but wonder about the difference between Michael Vick and a sex offender.

Vick was convicted of a crime that touches peoples hearts and minds. So do sex offenses.

Michael Vick was making upwards of 100 million dollars a year. Now, he's pushed into bankruptcy, and making $10 an hour.

But, because he has undeniable talent at the game of football, people are talking about rethinking his ban. They might let him play again.

They (the people) are using the philosophy of "If you server your time and pay your debt to society, then you can rejoin us."

But, that philosophy is only used at select times.

What about the talents of the people that have paid their debt to society, served their time, but can no longer be let back into what they were doing.

Here are two people whom prove my point (names have been changed):

Joe was an IT Tech for about 20 years. He was making over $100,000 a year. He moves to another state, and is forced to register in the public's eye for a crime he had committed back in 1989. Now, he can't pay his bills, and is in forclosure. He can't get ANY job that utilizes his skill sets.

Jim was a highly successful businessman. He had 2 entire floors in a highrise in downtown for his financial services company. After his ordeal was made public, he had to give up both floors, and fire his entire staff. He went from ungodly amount of money each year to making barely enough to live off of.

But, these two men will not be given the same courtesy that Michael Vick was.

The question is, "If a person serves their time, pays their debts, and live a good life, WHEN is enough enough?"