Love Letter to WestJet Employees

[tiggermoth]

You freemen need to get your shit together.

and what makes you think we need a home? why would we want to isolate from society?

Umm, Rob has been saying all along he wants to find his own hidden "freeman" valley

3. Do the Freemen agree or disagree as a society in the rights of an individual to choose any religion, or none at all; or do individual Freemen have the complete freedom to decide for themselves on this topic - free from recrimination from their fellow Freemen?

Dear Kirsten
The latter, on all.

so, how does that leave you scirefacias???

Just curious scirefacias, how does your religious views fit in with the "freeman" thinking

Like a glove

Doesn't sound like Rob is too tolerant of "free" thinking from previous answers to other questions so how can you be a truly Free man as you like to claim.

Based on these two examples I think you all need to go away for a while, sit down with one another and figure out what you actually are all about. The microscopic shred of credibility you guys still have as a "society" is rapidly becoming totally non existent. Get it together boys because we aren't buying into your crap, and never will.

Oh, and don't spout off any more shit about "not pushing your beliefs" on us here. If this were the truth you would have left us alone a long time ago when you first realized we are not interested, but you keep coming back over and over, obviously trying to convince us that you are right.

one last time, get off the dope.

[scirefacias]

"Doesn't sound like Rob is too tolerant of "free" thinking from previous answers to other questions so how can you be a truly Free man as you like to claim."

I don't know why you would judge anything by Rob Menard. Or what's written in this thread for that matter. This is the humor forum, right? Good comedy.

"Oh, and don't spout off any more shit about "not pushing your beliefs" on us here. If this were the truth you would have left us alone a long time ago when you first realized we are not interested, but you keep coming back over and over, obviously trying to convince us that you are right."

Well, this is the only thread I've posted in, so I think it is fairly well-contained. Anyone who is not interested can, of course, not read. Or just not read my posts. No? I do not really know what you mean by right, there. I like exercising my fingers, so, this is one way to do that. If you have a problem with it, well, that's very nice.

[tiggermoth]

I don't know why you would judge anything by Rob Menard. Or what's written in this thread for that matter.

Ummm, is he not supposedly the world freeman society founder. Is he not the one who started this thread. Is he not the one who refused to give a straight answer about anything, except for my above quote, during the first pages of this thread. Is he also not the one who "trained" and/or brainwashed you guys into his way of thinking. Is he not the one who convinced you guys you could live a life enjoying all the benefits of Canada or other countries without having to pay your FAIR share (hehe, that oughta get you clowns going). That is why I judge your society by what Mr. Menard has said/written.

Well, this is the only thread I've posted in, so I think it is fairly well-contained. Anyone who is not interested can, of course, not read. Or just not read my posts. No? I do not really know what you mean by right, there. I like exercising my fingers, so, this is one way to do that. If you have a problem with it, well, that's very nice.

My point was that you guys ALL, everyone of you, is spouting diferent things, your are ALL saying one thing and doing another. The only thing you guys have in common is that you do not want to pay for anything yourselves, but you expect everyone else to pay you for your services, whatever they may be. Why is that. Why are you guys so out of sinc with one another.

Why is it that you guys figure you are the only ones who "deserve" to be paid properly for your services. I can't remember if it was you or monk who said you are a contracter who only wants to be paid in CASH. Yet, you both refuse to recognize cash, or use it to pay others for their services. You all want to use a piece of paper, which means sweet @#$! all. I could sign any name I wanted to this piece of paper, what good would that do you then. Also, I took a spin through the Bill of Exchange act myself. Guess what, it does not say anything about submitting the so-called bill to the gov't for them to pay. It says that the payee will make the payment at a later date themselves. The question has already been asked, but as per normal with you guys, it wasn't answered at all, so here we go again....What do you do with the cash people give you for your services, if you refuse to pay anyone else with it?????? Where do you stash it????? Or do you just give it to Rob to support the cause and he uses for his go-karting and whatever else he was doing.

Now on to your government thoughts. You guys say you are not anti-government, you are pro good-government. Well here is my thoughts. You guys expect that through your BOE the government will pay your way for you, is that not good?? You refuse to pay for anything including insurance, so they government will pay your way for that to. Is that not good. You get to drive (I won't comment on whether legal or not because you guys don't seem to have a grasp on reality in that area) on nice maintained roads, who maintains them...the government. Is that not good??? If you get hurt or sick and need a doctor, who pays the doctor. The government. Is that not good???? You expect the RCMP to protect you and you rights. Who pays them, and pays for their equipment (cars, radio's etc). I imagine when you have to shit you use a toilet and flush into a public sewer system, who maintains that....the government.

Now, you all refuse to pay taxes, or let the government take from you, so where do you suppose the government under your ideals would get its funds. It wouldn't have any income, and poof the whole country goes broke and what are you left with??? No hospitals/doctors, no police protection, broken down gravel roads, everyone shitting and pissing wherever, which contributes to diseases. Oh oh, no hospitals to deal with diseases. Oh shit, no what. Complete anarchy, less then third world living conditions, people running wild beating and killing others just to survive.

Think about it, and not when stoned. If we all just stopped paying our taxes and went to live like you guys, this country (or any for that matter) would completely fall apart.

[sarg]

"
I don't know why you would judge anything by Rob Menard. Or what's written in this thread for that matter. This is the humor forum, right? Good comedy.

Actual if you learned to read and grasp the meanings you might be further ahead this forum is titled; Misc. / Political Debate / Aviation Humor. Most here are looking at this subject as the political debate part of the forum's title.

[sarg]

i administrate my own affairs well enough. did you know a post masters money order is still backed by gold? hmmm....

You've stated that a couple of times, so educate and provide a link to current document stating that fact.

[tehmastermonk]

I don't know why you would judge anything by Rob Menard. Or what's written in this thread for that matter.

Ummm, is he not supposedly the world freeman society founder. Is he not the one who started this thread. Is he not the one who refused to give a straight answer about anything, except for my above quote, during the first pages of this thread. Is he also not the one who "trained" and/or brainwashed you guys into his way of thinking. Is he not the one who convinced you guys you could live a life enjoying all the benefits of Canada or other countries without having to pay your FAIR share (hehe, that oughta get you clowns going). That is why I judge your society by what Mr. Menard has said/written.

Well, this is the only thread I've posted in, so I think it is fairly well-contained. Anyone who is not interested can, of course, not read. Or just not read my posts. No? I do not really know what you mean by right, there. I like exercising my fingers, so, this is one way to do that. If you have a problem with it, well, that's very nice.

My point was that you guys ALL, everyone of you, is spouting diferent things, your are ALL saying one thing and doing another. The only thing you guys have in common is that you do not want to pay for anything yourselves, but you expect everyone else to pay you for your services, whatever they may be. Why is that. Why are you guys so out of sinc with one another.

Why is it that you guys figure you are the only ones who "deserve" to be paid properly for your services. I can't remember if it was you or monk who said you are a contracter who only wants to be paid in CASH. Yet, you both refuse to recognize cash, or use it to pay others for their services. You all want to use a piece of paper, which means sweet @#$! all. I could sign any name I wanted to this piece of paper, what good would that do you then. Also, I took a spin through the Bill of Exchange act myself. Guess what, it does not say anything about submitting the so-called bill to the gov't for them to pay. It says that the payee will make the payment at a later date themselves. The question has already been asked, but as per normal with you guys, it wasn't answered at all, so here we go again....What do you do with the cash people give you for your services, if you refuse to pay anyone else with it?????? Where do you stash it????? Or do you just give it to Rob to support the cause and he uses for his go-karting and whatever else he was doing.

Now on to your government thoughts. You guys say you are not anti-government, you are pro good-government. Well here is my thoughts. You guys expect that through your BOE the government will pay your way for you, is that not good?? You refuse to pay for anything including insurance, so they government will pay your way for that to. Is that not good. You get to drive (I won't comment on whether legal or not because you guys don't seem to have a grasp on reality in that area) on nice maintained roads, who maintains them...the government. Is that not good??? If you get hurt or sick and need a doctor, who pays the doctor. The government. Is that not good???? You expect the RCMP to protect you and you rights. Who pays them, and pays for their equipment (cars, radio's etc). I imagine when you have to shit you use a toilet and flush into a public sewer system, who maintains that....the government.

Now, you all refuse to pay taxes, or let the government take from you, so where do you suppose the government under your ideals would get its funds. It wouldn't have any income, and poof the whole country goes broke and what are you left with??? No hospitals/doctors, no police protection, broken down gravel roads, everyone shitting and pissing wherever, which contributes to diseases. Oh oh, no hospitals to deal with diseases. Oh shit, no what. Complete anarchy, less then third world living conditions, people running wild beating and killing others just to survive.

Think about it, and not when stoned. If we all just stopped paying our taxes and went to live like you guys, this country (or any for that matter) would completely fall apart.

it is clear to me that you have not read teh entirety of my posts. i clearified these very issues several times over.

every single inconsistancy that you pointed out i have adreesed. you are operating on assumptions(like most people). and not one of those things you percieve is true.

we do pay for things. its just taht if a judge wants to contract us into thier laws, they will have to honor it, and not offer adhesion. i refuse to ask permission to do things that arent even crimes. i refuse to ask the city if i can have a cat. i refuse to ask the city if i can paint my fence.. oh wait a second.. its not really my fence, or my house. i pay for it, but they own it.. hmmm... and you actually defend taxes?

esau sold his birthright for creature comforts and egypt called joseph a savior when he put them in chains. that sound logical to you? or does that sound like exploitadion? or extortion maybe? eh? wait till you are hungry, then poffer food in exchange for your freedom, and your body. yeah. thats the system you defend.

i myself, will keep my birthright, and the government can stuff thier porrage down someone elses throat. if they wanna get me they gotta enter the jurisdiction i exist in. and if they did that, then they would be judged by the same standard they seek to judge me, and would have to be executed on the spot.

same with all you sheeple. if you cling on to these benefits, and try to serve two masters, you get screwed by both. anyhow, i guess you wont realize it untill some clown in a suit
comes and takes your baby away, or throws you in jail and takes all your privellages away
because you refused to act like a child.

and as for administarating my own affairs, im not goind to post those documents... waay too much info on there, its not just names that have to be blotted out, but also routing numbers,
tracking numbers, basically by the time i blotted out anything that makes it anonomys, you wouldnt recongnize what it is.

now given the tone of you guys, i could post all kinds of proof, and i do have it, but
you wont call it proof. you arent honestly inquiring. you are jsut looking for another argument.

to those that are willingly ignorant, no proof is sufficient. to those that are not, the proof is clear and unarguable. the best proof comes when you live the life.

[tehmastermonk]

i can enter a court and have a conversation with a judge, and go home happy.

can you? i can even have the judge take my place as the accused for me,
and bind him to his oath. can you?

i can refuse and directly say no to a judge and refuse for cause his offer and not get arrested.

can you?

i can also say yes, and contract the courts in, and so long as i have my bonds in place, and duties pre-emptivley fulfilled,i can replace the prosecutor. can you? do you know how to trump the prosecutors bond and enter as third party plaintiff on your own matter and hold a lwayer as feduciary bound by oath?

only a freeman can do that, with alot of work, and preperation. not recomended unless you know what your doing. and thus it is fulfilled"do not be worried when you are brought before kings and judges. The spirit of My Father shall give you the words to say in that very hour."

sounds like a bunch of religeoous hogwash right? well as you see, i am free, and when i enter a court room, the judge does not assume the same things regarding me as he will to you.

[tiggermoth]

it is clear to me that you have not read teh entirety of my posts. i clearified these very issues several times over.

I have, an NO YOU HAVE NOT. all you and your cohorts have ever done is talk around in circles and avoid any direct answers to questions.

every single inconsistancy that you pointed out i have adreesed. you are operating on assumptions(like most people).

Not true, this is the first time these inconsistencies have been brought up by anyone here. I checked. I am not "assuming" anything. I am stating facts using direct quotes from you guys. Re-read my post.

i can enter a court and have a conversation with a judge, and go home happy.

can you? i can even have the judge take my place as the accused for me,
and bind him to his oath. can you?

i can refuse and directly say no to a judge and refuse for cause his offer and not get arrested.

can you?

i can also say yes, and contract the courts in, and so long as i have my bonds in place, and duties pre-emptivley fulfilled,i can replace the prosecutor. can you? do you know how to trump the prosecutors bond and enter as third party plaintiff on your own matter and hold a lwayer as feduciary bound by oath?

only a freeman can do that, with alot of work, and preperation. not recomended unless you know what your doing. and thus it is fulfilled"do not be worried when you are brought before kings and judges. The spirit of My Father shall give you the words to say in that very hour."

sounds like a bunch of religeoous hogwash right? well as you see, i am free, and when i enter a court room, the judge does not assume the same things regarding me as he will to you.quote]

Alright, giv'er. do want you want in there, have fun, I really don't care. I do suspect you will be in for a shock if you tried a lot of this stuff but thats just my opinion.

Let me tell you something now, and please actually read and pay attention to this......

I have no need to know how to get a judge to take my place as the accused, I have no need to refuse and say no to a judge. I have no need to even enter court in the first place because I follow the laws, I live my life as a PROUD Canadian. I am not worried about some clown in a suit taking my children because I am a good parent, I care for my children so there is no reason for them to be taken, and they won't be. I am not worried about being thrown in jail, as I have done nothing to cause that, and never will. Therefore, your whole post about the judges and courts means nothing to me as it is nothing I have to be worried about.

Here is a question, and I want a direct, simple answer. Why is it you guys have spent so much time telling us about courts, judges, and how to get around them. Why. Are you worried about getting caught for something and facing a judge??? Are you worried that your activities really are illegal and you are just preparing a defence in advance??? If you were like me you would NOT HAVE to spend so much time figuring this crap out. You could just be out actually enjoying life and not having to even think about courts or judges or police. They don't worry me in the least.

[Rockie]

They erect the drug induced bubble around themselves that they think makes them exempt from Canadian law. It's the same thing little kids do when they hold their breath until they get their way, or stick their fingers in their ears and yell "lalalala". It's a complicated version of the ostrich theory. And they aren't smart enough to figure out that it doesn't actually change the world around them, just their perception of it.

[tiggermoth]

Hahaha, yup, Rockie, pretty much summed up these clowns whole life right there. Some day you freemen are going to get a big wakeup call, and then have fun with your therioes and warped sense of life.

I'm out, it's been hilarious watching you guys make complete asses of yourselves. Carry on, i will check in an see how you are doing from time to time but I think I have pretty much made my point. Your inability to give me straight, consise answers and constant worry about the courts has told me all I need to know.

Bye bye screwed up wacko's.

[scirefacias]

Ah, yes, more slanders---you know, I've thought this way far before I ever took any drugs.

As I said, my personal motivation for helping match the Keys up with Beggars willing to take Counsel, rather than lockjaw'd sometime Kings, is that I am sick and tired of watching the dance called drug prohibition. I have been tired of this dance for as long as I can remember; one of my earliest memories is indeed a gov't employee talking about drug prohibition while drinking a cup of coffee. And if you don't see why that's a ghastly hypocrisy (seein' as some of you seem to like that term) then nothing I say will help; and, in truth, we needn't see it the same way. You needs must, however, leave my friends alone, you "PROUD Canadian."

Of what are you proud? The pre-meditated murder of a polish immigrant to Canada? The 40,000+ yearly arrests for the vegetable marihuana? The railways that ensure the locals stay in line, and if they don't, the possibility of martial law and rapid troop transport? The highways, ditto? The healthcare system, so you can be in the medical form decided upon by doctors in council with the insurance companies, which just so happens to be opposed to every poetry and utopia, just so happens those things aren't so good for health, and, funny how what's good for health is what's good for work, right? What a coincidence =]

If it seems you're running into a few Heads who believe this stuff, it's because drug users are some of the only remaining people who care to think for its own sake; to examine life not to determine how to get more shiny products but how to live well. The un-ex-amine'd life is not worth living, at least per Socrates.

"Are you worried that your activities really are illegal and you are just preparing a defence in advance???"

The Government of which you are so proud is a criminal organization involved in an ongoing conspiracy to deprive the free men and women of North America of their children, their gardens and their labor capacity. Their children insofar as the birth "must" be registered with the State; their gardens insofar as there are lists of "forbidden fruit" which one may not grow (funny how the forbidden plants are those that would lessen reliance on doctors...); their labor capacity insofar as they are brainwashed from a very early age into thinking "you cannot work without this piece of plastic with a number on it! You are not able to work without being a sinner!" And on the topic of bubble...

"They erect the drug induced bubble around themselves that they think makes them exempt from Canadian law."

Canadian law is only applicable by consent; one must be a member of some governmental society. One need not be a member of Canada or subject to the statutes thereof. And this sort of voluntarism has appeared sensible to me for many years; perhaps you could go the whole hog and offer a more honest eugenicist argument? Certain men and women are simply incapable of understanding the perigrinations of Canada's Government; at the first Parliament, for example, Sir John A MacDonald (A MacDonald? Good for him!) introduces a few dead men, and then they give big speeches. There is a drug induced bubble, but it ain't illicit drug induced; it's al alcohol-induced bubble. Here is how it works:

Wage laborerer becomes addicted to alcohol.
Wage laborerer begins to determine political actions based on how it will restrict his ability to consume alcohol.
For example, when the cop on a beach says "pour out your beer," at that moment he bursts with Pride knowing that as a Canadian he may simply pretend he has no balls, pour out his beer, say "thank you, Sir, may I have another?" and, God willing, once the officer goes back to the Timmy Ho's, he may take out another beer and drink that one. If he made a fuss, he might get a ticket; the officer might take the rest of his beer. And we all know that being out there enjoying beer is more important than ensuring the administration of justice doesn't fall into disrepute, right?
And this is not merely applicable to beer; it is applicable to medical services, cellphones, automobiles, cheesecake, coffee, everything. Don't make waves with the officers! Get out there and "enjoy life", that is, enjoy purchasing and exchanging the products/services which Your Masters have deigned to allow you.

"It's the same thing little kids do when they hold their breath when until they get their way, or stick their fingers in their ears and yell "lalalala". It a way more complicated version of the ostrich theory. And they aren't smart enough to figure out that it doesn't actually change the world around them, just their perception of it."

Correct. So a return to the ancient law grounded upon the eternal law shouldn't be too difficult. You will needs must remove your fingers from your ears at some point; you will remove the coverings from your eyes and let the light shine on in. The sky will be yellow, and the sun will be blue! Dogs and cats, living together, utter insanity! And it will be beautiful, because there is more beauty in an unoccluded eye than in all of the industrial contrivances ever wrought.

As to perception,

perception Look up perception at Dictionary.com
1483, "receiving, collection," from L. perceptionem (nom. perceptio) "perception, apprehension, a taking," from percipere "perceive" (see perceive). First used in the more literal sense of the L. word; in secondary sense, "the taking cognizance of," it is recorded in Eng. from 1611. Meaning "intuitive or direct recognition of some innate quality" is from 1827.

Thus, you could very well see it as a re-collection, that is, to take back into use one's birthright; for even old Jacob was more honest than these Proud Canadians. Jacob told Esau straight up---"yo, I am taking advantage of your hunger to gain your birthright." Can we say as well of those doing the same act today?

[Rockie]

So sayeth the lord

[Hedley]

Who cares what the law says - this thread is the best
argument for not doing drugs that I have ever seen.

[scirefacias]

It depends what one wants out of life.

If one wants to live well, that will take examination.

If one wishes to subsist, that probably takes very little examination; simply head to the vital statistics office and say "One mess of pottage---I'm sorry, birth certificate---please." You may then use your mess of pottage to apply for all sorts of subsistence-oriented programs. There's nothing wrong with this; the problem is the assertion that it's somehow necessary. Now, the College of Arms in Lundun has recorded pedigrees for the queen's beasts for who knows how long; however, the registration of children in parish, etc. registers is rather much newer. The original enactments re: vital statistics state that the issue is to clarify and facilitate descent of estates, that is, real property.

Now, keeping large numbers of people uninterested in examining their lives fed, clothed and employed takes a degree of regimentation; but to say 'the only way we may keep them all fed, clothed and employed is to force everyone to act as though he had no birthright' is noy only a lie, it is tyranny. Sure, today's tyranny is not being put in the irons for being a "witch" (today Abortion is nice and legal!), nor is it being put in the stocks for divination/prophesying without warrant of ability (astrology is nice and legal!), nor is it being gaoled for making unjust gains (heck, the government runs lotteries!), but it is being told one cannot smoke in one's own car with one's own children. It is being told that one cannot grow medicinal plants and must instead be totally subject to the whimsy of the members of the established Medical Colleges. It is being told that one must vaccinate their children even if they have religious or scientific concerns about vaccination. It is being denied the right of a parent not through demonstrated inability proven in a court of Record but through the ad hoc determination of a social worker.

"She is about to deliver her sixth child, not counting the set of twins she lost. But it isn’t the birthing process that has her worried.

Government workers have seized every single child the moment it is born — a baby girl (Breanna) was apprehended in Alberta and four other kids, two girls (Chyanne and Laura) and two boys (Dean and Jake), have been taken into care here.

“None of them,” Barbara lamented. “I’ve not been allowed to breast-feed any of them.”

The routine always has been the same — shortly after delivery, once Barbara is cleaned up and had a moment of rest, a social worker arrives, flips her a card, declares the child is being apprehended and leaves with the baby.

Her sense of impending dread in the final days of this latest pregnancy was palpable.

“It is horrific,” the auburn-haired woman said. “All the labour, carrying and delivering a baby, and then they rip it from your arms. It’s cruel. They take the baby to the special care nursery and I’mdischarged later the same day.”"
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/feat ... 26bfcf0c4c

Why can't you "proud canadians" simply grow some balls and execute these people whom you and your social workers so clearly view as detritus, life unworthy of life, not even fit to reproduce itself?

[Cat Driver]

Jesus H. F'n Christ how many of these idiots are there in society?

How did the gene pool get this contaminated?

[tehmastermonk]

um. dude.. we are not in society. we are free. if yo look up vattels works, the over all goal and purpose in teh laws of nations as set out and amended in 1751, thier ultimate goal is the end of civil societey and the need for such seperations in the uptopic world. hogwash.


as for how many, the answer is .. 1

unless someone else can be me, inwich case i would not be me, so the answer is still 1.

[scootr]

The freemen participants have raised another indirect interesting point..... they make several referrals to laws that were enacted(?) a couple a hundred, to many hundreds of years ago..... it would be a safe bet that anything from that time, would be based on the moral majority of the society at the time.... and religion had a much stronger grip on society then, than it does now..... so while the wording of those laws will have been amended in the last couple of hundred years, the laws sustained and enforced by the duly elected government(I voted) are the same laws from centuries ago....

My point is, those laws came through by religious influence, so standing behind a bible and saying "down with ye ideals, and follow my wayith", are you not being hypocritical?

Another item that interests myself, is the thought that some people need to find the strength to make it through a tough time, by turning to a god, rather than believing that they have the strength to persevere in themselves.... get a backbone free people's, you got yourself into this freeman mess, god ain't going to get you out, either make it work, send out a clear concise message that actually makes some sense to the masses, or continue to be a freeman's sheeple, trying to carry forward an agenda that doesn't make one bit of logical, non-god related, sense.

PS: are you thinking of bringing back witch burning?

[Rockie]

They would quote a spiderman comic if they thought it fit their self-centred hypocritical don't pay for what I take mentality. It's called justifying anti-social behavior by whatever means possible no matter how absurd or irrelevant. In their case it is pages and pages and pages of utter BS in the hope that our SOCIETY will either accept it, or give up and just give them what they want. Which is a free ride to do whatever they want, where ever they want, and not have to pay for it.

[scirefacias]

So, Rockie, your society, what's its name?

And, for your enjoyment, a Poem:

Random Poem #1248308676


beauty
happyness!
passion
corage
love
earth


death
passion
order
nature
passion
sky


beauty
humankind
humankind
sad

[Rockie]

So, Rockie, your society, what's its name?

I shouldn't be surprised you don't know. It's called Canadian Society. What's the name of your religion?

[scirefacias]

Ah, Canadian Society!

A religion, unlike a society, is not merely an artificial person; thus, I was asking the name of the artificial person in which you claim membership. Google gives many Canadian Societies, e.g.

CSIC - Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants
CSSE - The Canadian Society for the Study of Education
Canadian Society for Civil Engineering

Is it one of those in which you claim membership?

Does your society have a website at gc.ca?

"Domain name: gc.ca
Domain status: EXIST
Domain number: 23868
Approval date: 2000/10/18
Renewal date: 2011/04/19
Updated date: 2009/06/15

Registrar:
Name: Internic.ca Corp.
Number: 29

Registrant:
Name: Government of Canada/Gouvernement du Canada
Number: 23868

Administrative contact:
Name: Jacqui Cole
Job Title: Registrar - GoC
Postal address: Government of Canada
11 Laurier Street
Hull QC K1A 0S5 Canada
Phone: +1 (819) 956-1746
Fax: +1 (819) 956-5357
Email: registry@gc.ca"

So that's Government of Canada, not "Canadian Society", but that's a decent try.

A religion need not have a name to exist as a set of beliefs; a corporation, however, requires a name, which is the knot of its incorporation, without which it is nothing. So, again, what's that name? Or do you stick by "Canadian Society"?

[Rockie]

Don't be a deliberate dolt. Canadian Society is not an individual, it is a collection of 30 million or so people living under one set of laws in a nation called Canada. Try as you might, you will not be able to make that not so.

Plus you're forgetting this little gem of yours:

"Show me your society. Put it on a scale; that's right, it doesn't exist. It is merely conceptual, largely predicated at this point on the uniformity of public indoctrination."

Which contradicts with this nugget that just came out of you:

"A religion need not have a name to exist as a set of beliefs;"

You need to try and be a little more consistent with your arguments. Also you still didn't say the name of your fictious religion.

[scirefacias]

"Don't be a deliberate dolt. Canadian Society is not an individual, it is a collection of 30 million or so people living under one set of laws in a nation called Canada. Try as you might, you will not be able to make that not so."

Yes, and that collective must have a name. Is the name "Canadian Society", or is the name "Canada"? They sound rather different, no?

I am not denying that there are subject persons living under incorporeality enforced corporally, that is, over their bodies; what I humbly suggest is that such enforcement is only possible by the presumed consent of the governed; that is, those 30 million people are presumed to consent to "living under one set of laws in a nation called Canada." And this nation, or family, is not a geographical area but a body politic, body corporate, call it what you will.

"WHEN a corporation is erected, name muft be given it; and by that name alone it muft fue, and be fued, and do all legal acts ; though a very minute variation therein is not material u. Such name is the very being of it's conftitution ; and, though it is the will of the king that erects the corporation, yet the name is the knot of it's combination, without which it could not perform it's corporate functions w. The name of incorporation, fays fir Edward Coke, is a proper name, or name of baptifm; and therefore when a private founder gives his college or hofpital a name, he does it only as godfather ; and by that fame name the king baptizes the incorporation x."
1 Bl. Comm Ch. 18:462-463.

""Show me your society. Put it on a scale; that's right, it doesn't exist. It is merely conceptual, largely predicated at this point on the uniformity of public indoctrination."

Which contradicts with this nugget that just came out of you:

"A religion need not have a name to exist as a set of beliefs;""

Well, here we are getting into some rather Heady metaphysics. A religion need not have a name to exist as a set of beliefs. That seems fairly clear, as we could denote {A, B, C}, where A, B and C are beliefs as a set of beliefs constituting a religion. A solitary individual, Jane, could believe A, B and C without requiring any corporate name for her beliefs. Another solitary individual, Jack, could believe them just as well as Jane. However, once Jack and Jane get together in Society, they must vest that set {A, B, C} in some third body, the artificial body that will hold the union of their natural wills, otherwise, in case of dispute, Jack and Jane could simply claim to each have their own set---Jack's {A, B, C} and Jane's {A, B, C}. If Jack and Jane wish to live in society, the whole point is that they create The Belief Society's {A, B, C}, and they both undertake the duty to follow A, B and C not as determined by their natural wills, which may be inclined to constantly re-interpret A, B and C, but by the will of the Society, which is taken to be constant except as amended by whatever process {A, B, C} specifies for amendment thereof.

So while individuals may have beliefs without name that are said to exist as beliefs without name, that is, a religion, it seems untenable that a Society could exist without a name; and the name of a Society is a precise thing, without which, it is in contemplation non-existent, it being merely a name with certain statements annexed thereto. One may believe in a set of statements without giving them a name. One may not assert a society exists and has its own law (statements given force) without that society having a name.

So, again, what is the name of your society?

is it Canadian Society?
is it Canada?
Is it "Army Hospital Daze"?

[Rockie]

Aren't you embarrassed? Everytime someone answers your question with an unequivical answer, or asks you a simple question requiring nothing more than a yes or a no, you respond with a flood of absolute nonsensical bullshit. You ask if Canadian society has a name. I said yes, it's called Canadian society. A hamster is smart enough to know what that means, but apparently you aren't. You will look at a white piece of paper and argue up and down that it's black.

It's a wonder you manage to haul your ass out of bed in the morning. Oh, I forgot, you don't have a bed. You don't have a house. You don't eat. You don't have a computer or the internet. It's all a figment of our imagination. The only thing in this world that's real is your religion that you still haven't made up a name for.

And the drugs of course. They're very real.

[. ._]

bump