I have been asked if the Amendments to the Constitution are also invalid?  Written constitutions are the source of more written law.  Written law is always limited and hardly ever invalid. I have called belief in the Constitution a cult and cults can be very powerful.  “A Constitution,” “this Constitution,” or “the Constitution,” are thoughts that […]

read more

Comments

2 Responses to “WHAT ABOUT AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION?”

  1. Joel Boyce on November 25th, 2008 10:30 pm

    From what you teach, Dr. Rivera, it is apparent that the Articles of Confederation established the original pact between the 13 colonial states. We can all agree on that point.

    Next, you teach a secret convention took place which did not eliminate at all the Articles, but rather incorporated most of the principles they contain along with a kind of very fancy Amendment to the Articles, which is titled “Constitution for the United States of America”.

    This allowed for the President Elect to appoint himself President of the U.S., and if the Article VI oath was actually taken, to “adopt” the written constitution. That President of the U.S. was given an executive power he did not possess under the Articles, and also created the illusion that the one branch government, an Article I Congress, was made to appear as a three branch government.

    In fact what exists to this day under that amendment to the Articles is a legislative government given exclusive power to legislate over the property of the United States, using a President of the U.S. to execute his legislative powers over that property, and a judicial department which is completely under the supervision of the legislature, also protecting the interests of U.S. property. Sounds like proprietary powers being exercised by Congress, the President of the U.S. and the judicialry. That is actually what was created by “the constitution”, that is: the organization, not the document.

    The Constitution for the United States of America, if ratified by all 13 original states, would have had unanamous support and actually would have had a perfect legal origin, but since only 9 ratified, it caused a rift in the Articles by reason that 4 states were never required to ratify by its terms and thus full quorum acceptance was overruled by 9 rogue states which purported to create amendments into the concepts originally agreed to by 13 states.

    And as a political ploy to overcome the people’s objections to what they correctly perceived as a central government takeover attempt, “the Constitution” Amendment was further amended by the first “Ten Amendments”. Thus those amendments can in no way ever be understood to protect unalienable rights, but only legislative rights.

    Only some state delegates and a few Citizens purported to create “the constitution” that over two centuries, has sponsored political conduct that today is into every inhabitant’s private life and property, into every bank and securities account, every corporate businesss, every employment relationship, every marriage and family, every school, almost all churches, and spreads across the globe to sit in over 700 military outposts throughtout the world.

    Not bad for an amendment to the Articles of Confederation, pretending to replace the Articles. But what a gargantuan nightmare for everyone else worldwide that just wants to be left alone.

  2. eliza21887 on November 27th, 2008 8:23 pm

    I am looking at “expostfact laws” confusing it all.

    I understand that for any law to be law has to have “enacting clause”.

    Check out http://www.freedom-school.com

    We are dealing with Constitution that most likely is mixed and needs to be clearly defined between what is Law with “enacting clause” and what is fraud “Statutory copyrighted for the corporations”.

    Then there is jurisdictions and what applies.
    What I see is that our universal Law is jurisdiction under Our Creator of heaven and earth, of the visible and invisible. Then we have our enemy jurisdiction that is the devil, demons and whatever is in this earth that doesn’t apply creating the color of law.

    If the corporate state is bound to the federal corporate goverment; then who is the federal corporate governmen bound to. As far as I see This Federal body was not created by the people under God Jurisdiction. Was this terrestrial creation or demonic?

    We need to simplify the monster.

    With all due respect, I just got all confused with what I see and cannot digest.

    I love you all and God will claim his children back no matter what…

    God’s people are distroyed by lack of knowledge and we need to get out of the lack of it.