Saturday, December 29, 2012

Secession Allegiance and Religion


Most people, or shall I say, most conservatives see something is terribly wrong
with the country today, but they blame everything but the right things. One of
the top comments I get from people is that we are not patriotic enough, or that people
such as myself are unpatriotic. People do not know what true patriotism is any
more, and I doubt if many of you reading this do either. So to clear up some
confusion, I am going to give you the order of where you should place your allegiance
and patriotism.

We hear people complain about the government and how it has lost touch with
the people. I am told, VOTE, be patriotic, do your duty. I ask; What is my duty;
to vote?  Honestly, do you ever see this changing anything? Has anything in the
federal government changed for the better in your lifetime? You dad's lifetime?
His dad's lifetime? The question is; What are you gonna do about it?

The following bears worth repeating. People are so dumbed down they have little
or no idea how or where they are to place their allegiance and patriotism. They
don't have a clue as to the order, with most everyone thinking or acting as if the
federal government is all there is to follow and place their allegiance in. They
think they can take a tyrannical government and correct it simply by voting, which
is what they equate to patriotism. Or they think joining the military, fighting and
dying is being patriotic. Nothing could be further from the truth as I tried to explain
to others at a blog who accused me of being unpatriotic and un-American because
I would not fight to restore DC and their form of pseudo "conservative" government.
I was told to leave the united states if it was not worth fighting for. Here is what
I posted back. Keep in mind that people in general do not know their order
allegiance, so you have to remind them... Your allegiance is NOT to the federal
government, that is a lie you've been indoctrinated into accepting in order that the
federal government may have a free reign to go to war anywhere it likes and to
pass whatever laws unto you that it deems necessary for it's safety, NOT yours!

My response: 

My state of North Carolina is worth fighting for. That is my home and my country!
Your state is worth fighting for, as that is your home and country! Patriotism originally
comes from the Greek meaning inheritor of my father’s land. (Or very similarly stated.)
Specifically; What and where is your father’s land? How did he get it and how did he
pass it to you? Your father’s land originally was the state, which is also the country he
lived in. He did not originally live in Washington DC, but in the state he called home.
This was completely true and accepted until Lincoln’s War changed this thinking with
reconstruction. (The whole nation was reconstructed, not just the South.) The union and
federal government is NOT worth fighting for. The united states is NOT my home nor
my country! It is merely a representative of our many countries, our many states.

The order in which one *supposed* is to show honor and respect is as follows.

1-God
2-Family
3-Friends and neighbors
4-Neighborhood or locality or community
5-Area region
6-State (State and country is dependent upon structure.)
7-Country
8-Nation
9-Government (Government would apply in place of No. 8 if a nation did not exist.)
Notice I did NOT add religious denominations, but religion is to be understood to be
the Christian religion including Catholicism.--NOT Mormonism or Judaism or such..
Neither is a part of Christianity.

Note: the above is a general order according to the structure of a geographic location
that would end up being a nation. A nation is simply a geographical area that
includes a people with like minds, philosophies, religion, culture and heritage.
There can be deviations but the overall effect is that the vast majority of people hold
these same or similar ideals. Note the similarity as stated in the Declaration of 
Independence from Great Britain, “We hold these truths to be self-evident…..”  As a nation all people are *supposed* to accept this basis as their basis of national unity. Sadly this does not exist today.

Note: The order is correct but there can be additions when properly placed, or there can
be certain omissions when need be, but the order remains the same in accordance to
importance. Good government is ruled from the bottom up, not from the top down, and 
your allegiance should be in like order.

Note: The government is nothing more than the will of a unified people, doing their 
bidding on a larger scale, before the countries and nations of the world. This is also why
the Federal Government *supposed* to be an agent of the states, of which the states are
representative countries. This is also why the STATES have the Inalienable Right to secede.

Note: A country by itself is not necessarily a nation, but it can be an independent country
with all the rules, laws and government of a nation when independent of national status.
A nation is merely several states with a central government representing them. 

I owe NO allegiance to any nation or government that does not fully recognize my sovereignty and right to self-determination. There is no way humanly possible, short of conflict that I can make a national government recognize my Inalienable Rights if they choose to ignore them. This is what the Federal Government in Washington DC has chosen to do. I owe them and such people as those that place their allegiance in the Federal Government NOTHING! I owe you nothing because you are part of the problem, if you are in standing with a degenerate nation and federal government in DC! The federal government is far past the point of ever correcting it's wrongs, it's usurpation of our Inalienable Rights, our states and countries. I ask you; Who has benefited from this?


Michael– Deo Vindicabamur

12 comments:

  1. Very well stated.

    I feel the need to post and share that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That and a double shot of bourbon will start your Sunday well.:)

      Delete
  2. Hear! Hear!..............well stated! I find it utterly surprizing when I state similar thoughts to media indoctrinated fellow "conservatives" and they look at you like you're from another planet.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have on small quibble.
    "A nation is simply a geographical area that
    includes a people with like minds, philosophies, religion, culture and heritage. "
    This would be the definition of a country,"Noun

    A nation with its own government, occupying a particular territory."

    Nation is," A large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.
    A North American Indian people or confederation of peoples."
    nation comes from the same root as natal.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On a slightly related note, I'm watching Birth Of A Nation on netflix right now.

      Delete
    2. I have gone back to visit the Mennonite church today near the Aurora theater where the shooting was on July 20. I sat down at my daughter's computer just now and scanned the document I picked up at the church. I think Michael will be interested in its first sentence.

      "We believe that the church is God's "holy nation," called to give full allegiance to Christ its head and to witness to all nations about God's saving love."

      Works for me. I'll post the whole thing on my Google+ page. Take a slug of bourbon for me, Brock. I loved that stuff. I've been watching the Moonshiners series on cable and revisiting days gone by and remembering the little charred oak barrel of moonshine that Lewis Burwell had in a baby's cradle behind his oil burning heater in Floyd VA. Every time we walked by it we hit the rocker with our toe to speed the process.

      I have only one travel goal for 2013, PATCON in May.

      Delete
    3. Great maybe we can go visit Popcorn's haunts when you are here!

      http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2011/08/repost-from-23-apr-2010-popcorn-sutton.html

      Delete
  4. I would have responded earlier but I've wrote/answered over 100 posts and comments today. I still have about 3 or 4 more and I'm getting wore down. It's very dumbed down word out there and I'm trying to educate the best I can.....

    But Wow! I didn't expect the topic to turn to nations. I caught flack over the religions I gave credit, or took credit away from. But no fear, I had already discussed nations and countries with Michael Hill and Michael Cushman a few months ago. My responses to them has been combined together, so it is kind'of long.

    From our discussion:
    I note you had mentioned earlier that I used, or the modern terminology was used in defining country and nation. I actually base my thoughts on the understanding of the terms from Scriptural writing and interpretations of those writings. Also as has been mentioned there are several ways to understand the meaning of the two terms, especially nation. There are reasons for these discrepancies that can be traced back to the Bible itself and even to the original writing in Greek and Hebrew. It is by no mere accident that the terms get confused because it actually depends on the context of how it is meant, both from a physical and spiritual aspect. So I cannot fault anyone for which way they understand and use the terms, but there is a proper way. I can only give you my own personal understanding of it. btw, Tim Manning will agree with much of what I write because we've already touched on part of this with some of his writings.


    I’ll only give the introductory usage of the terms in the KJV Bible. This would be Genesis 10:5 In that verse "nation" is the word used but there is also another word that is used that is in reference to "countries".
    Here is the verse, "By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations. "

    To make the explanation easier to start, here is the commentary from John Gill. That is, by those sons of Japheth before mentioned; and by "isles" are meant, not countries surrounded with water, for the isles in this sense would not have been sufficient for the posterity of Japheth; nor can it be thought they would leave the continent, where there was room enough for them, and go into islands; and besides must have found it difficult to get there, when shipping and navigation were little known: but it is usual with the Hebrews, of whom Moses, the writer of this history, was, to call all places beyond the Mediterranean sea, or whatsoever they went to by sea, or that were upon the sea coasts, islands, as Greece, Italy Moreover, the word sometimes signifies countries, as it does in ( Job 22:30 ) ( Isaiah 20:6 ) and so should be rendered here, as it is by some F25, "the countries of the Gentiles"; so called, because in the times of Moses, and at the writing of this history, those countries were inhabited by Heathens and idolaters, strangers to the true religion: and this division was not made at random, and at the pleasure of a rude company of men, but in an orderly regular manner, with the consent, and by the advice and direction of the principal men of those times; and especially it was directed by the wise providence of the most High, who divided to the nations their inheritance, and set the bounds of the people, ( Deuteronomy 32:8).
    Part 1

    ReplyDelete
  5. Part 2
    (next specifically: "...after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.")
    This shows, that what is said concerning the division of countries to the sons of Japheth is by way of anticipation; and that, though thus related, was not done till after the confusion of languages, since the partition was made according to the different languages of men; those that were of the same language went and dwelt together, the several nations of them, and the several families in those nations; by which it appears that this was done by consultation, with great care and wisdom, ranging the people according to their tongues; of which nations were formed, and with them were taken the several families they consisted of.

    It is stated and rightfully so, that country could have possibly been used in place of isle, and it explained why it wasn't. In studying word terminology it is noted that country is also in reference, Biblically, to heathen. Yet there is also the distinction and relationship to the word isle. Accordingly, country can denote either ethnic, ethos and or boundaries. Now the question becomes, when to use which in its' proper context.

    By Genesis 10:5 we have a direct use of the word "nation". Yet those families sent to those nations held many faiths and religious practices, at least originating from the same parents and families. Thus we have a factual statement that the people were divided and sent to the nations because of their language and families. Now the question becomes; why involve a whole family? What's the significance of family in this respect? Does it simply mean kin, or is there more to the connection? In Latin the word "family" means much more than just blood relations. Again we have to make the distinction
    between the physical and spiritual.

    Going back to the top of verse 10:5 we see the distinction made that defines a country in relation to an isle, as mentioned. This same distinction can be applied much the same way in land locked countries, which you hinted on with your remarks concerning "timber country". In both instances above it shows a "refinement" and narrowing of the use of word country, which makes the subject more specific. Yet as we know an isle or a forest can cover a lot or a little land mass. So again there is more to determining a country than mass and size alone. As you yourself stated it can be in reference to trees as well as land itself. Yet the word isle was used with the object of avoiding the word country simply because it denoted the word
    "heathen", and heathen has nothing to do with land mass or trees. So the question becomes; What denotes "heathen"?

    In short we are back to faith and ethos. One thing is for sure at this point, the word country doesn't just mean land area.

    It's pretty well obvious that nation contains more than just land areas, for we discovered above that it also includes the family relationships, and you pointed some of this out also. However what is NOT taken into consideration is the passage of time itself, (John Gill did remark about future generations which be relative to time.) all of which begs a statement and 2 questions; one can place countries inside nations, but can one place nations within countries? And can one place nations within nations? It's not possible according to the verse, or at least it's not taken into consideration. This is where the context starts playing the bigger part.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Part 3
    Today we have taken many countries and tied them together as a Federation, or at least we are fooled into thinking this is so. This federation is called a union, or at least we are fooled into thinking so. Yet each of those countries at one time had defining characteristics that made them a country. Else the Founding Fathers were wrong in calling the states countries and should
    have called each of them a nation at the time of their founding, but as noted they were originally referred to as countries. And they referred to the sum total as a nation. Yet within that nation it had many languages, many races, and cultures.

    I will be the first to admit that English was the predominant language and Christianity was the predominant religion, but there were more than enough of the others to dilute and cause the resultant society to be a hybrid, and this is NOT and in NO way following the writ or the spirit of the Scripture in Genesis 10:5. Again somebody goofed!

    Going back again to Genesis 10:5 we know that MANY nations were formed from that verse. We also know that the heathens or gentiles had many different religions and languages. Therefore it only made sense that many nations were
    formed. Also note that in Hebrew the word "Goyim" can also mean nation. Considering the word Goyim is plural for all non Jews representing gentiles and or heathens to the Jews, NO plural for the word nation exists as such, which is why in some translations the word is left as is and is also used as a proper name. It is used to express ALL non-Jews as a distinct nation of people, NOT necessarily nations (plural). It is now possible and practicable to refer and use the word nation to mean a specific type of people, yet we know the united States was composed of many nations that came from different countries AND other nations. And this included the Jews also!(Or Khazars, your choice.)

    Now my questions becomes:
    What is more specific, a country or nation?
    What word has and carries the most refinement, country or nation? Then and now?
    Which word is the most diverse, country or nation?
    Which word covers land mass and which is spiritual, country or nation?
    How do you distinguish the two, country and nation?
    How can these relations change between country and nation?
    What has caused these changes to take place over time, between the words country and nation?

    And finally; what are the end results?


    I no longer have any real country because all types of people live around me, in my stae, although my locality, say within a mile
    mite be my country. I do not have a nation because nations do not exist any more as originally created, although I live in a nation that has many languages, cultures and peoples of all types. My people have been destroyed by
    their loss of country AND nation! Yet their spirit lives forever, and our country and nation lives within that spirit!

    Michael-- Deo Vindicabamur

    ReplyDelete