Do you intend to keep all of the governments commandments?

[Stephen]

You know...the law books just keep on growing. All of these legislators, do-gooders, and evil intentioned people seeking to control by law what you and I do each day. To decide for us what light bulbs we can use...how you are allowed to use your own land...etc. These people over time have amassed a stifling amount of laws that if you actually knew all the laws...you would know that there are plenty you are breaking without even knowing it.

A friend who is a cop told me about the motor vehicle laws. He told me that there are so many laws now that even the cops don't know them all. He motioned with his hands to say that the book is like a foot thick. He said "A person can't drive 10 feet down the street without breaking some vehicle law".

We are a part of a religion where being law abiding is a part of our doctrine.

I just wonder about what our attitude should be about the ever growing voluminous ridiculous laws in the US. Are we seeking to keep all of them? Are we seeking to see which are the constitutional laws that we should "befriend"?

What brought this up in my mind is that my children have a little lemonade stand that they have occasionally put up and made some pocket change in the summertime. A relative was giving us grief that we need to have a permit...and pay taxes on that money...and that if we don't we could be given a hefty fine by enforcement.

That just makes me ill! That the America that I live in...that that would make any sense!! My attitude is initially a "they can take a flying leap"...but at the same time...if it is the law...as ridiculous as it is...perhaps I should humor keeping it.

Your thoughts?

[Original_Intent]

There have been a few battles on these forums regarding this issue.

One of the core problems we have is we feel that elected officials, once elected, can do whatever they want. When the Democrats win they say "We won!" as the end of any debate - in other words that their election was a mandate from the people to do whatever they want. The constitution is an afterthought if that. Most of the time, whether the consittution authority exists to do something is not even a consideration. Wehn asked where the consitution authorised Obamacare, Nancy Pelosi responded angrily, "Are you kidding me?!? Are you KIDDING ME?!?!

My position is that a good number of the numerous laws are "unlawful laws". I believe the constitution is the supreme law of the land, second only to the Lord's law. Even a constitutional amendment, if it violates the Lord's law is usurpation by the masses - slavery to democracy.

As you were talking about with your kids' lemonade stand - this is bureaucratic regulation disguised as law. We must choose our battles wisely. But I don;t think you are morally obligated to obey such "laws".

[jnjnelson]

I intend to keep all the laws I consider to be constitutional and that support that principle of freedom in maintaining my rights and priviledges.

And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.
And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.

The doctrine in the Church that specifies that we should be law abiding citizens is conditional:

We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and crebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

[moonwhim]

re: lemonade stands
Is There Anything We Are Still Free To Do Without Government Permission?

The American Dream
July 18, 2011

If you plan on using the bathroom before you get done reading this article, you might want to check with the government to see if you are still allowed to do that. There are very, very few things that Americans still have the freedom to do today without government permission. Back in the old days, if young kids wanted to earn some extra money they would set up a little stand outside and sell some lemonade or some cookies. For many little kids, this was their very first practical experience with making money. Once upon a time, you would see lemonade stands all over the place during the summer in America. In fact, “lemonade stands” became such a part of American culture that people knew exactly what you were talking about the moment you mentioned them. Even up until a couple of decades ago, nobody would have ever dreamed that little kids would need the permission of the government in order to set up a little stand to sell some lemonade or some cookies. But today, everything has completely changed. If you are a little kid and you try to sell some lemonade in “Amerika” today, the authorities will swoop in and shut you down in a heartbeat.

This is happening all over the nation. Recently, three little girls in Midway, Georgia decided that they would set up a lemonade stand so that they could raise some money to go to a waterpark. Well, the stand was up for just one day before the police came by and cracked down on the girls.

Apparently “the law” requires that anyone selling anything to eat or drink in Midway must get a “business license” that would have cost the girls $50 a day.

Needless to say, the girls were not going to be making $50 a day selling lemonade, so they are effectively banned from ever having a lemonade stand.

So what is the big deal? Well, the police in Midway say that “health and safety” are the primary concerns. The police chief in Midway put it this way….

‘We were not aware of how the lemonade was made, who made the lemonade, or what the lemonade was made with”

Really?

Does the government now have to know everything?

This is an example of how the “nanny state” has gotten completely and totally out of control.

But this is the same kind of philosophy that caused federal agents to conduct a surprise raid on an Amish farmer at 5 AM one morningbecause he was selling raw milk.

We no longer have the freedom to grow food or make something to drink and sell it to our neighbors.

To the control freaks in government, that is way too “dangerous”.

Even young kids recognize how crazy this all is. The following is what one of the young girls had to say after the lemonade stand was shut down….

“It’s kind of crazy that we couldn’t sell lemonade,” added 14-year-old Casity Dixon. “It was fun, but we had to listen to the cops and shut it down.”

Yes, Casity, it is crazy.

The following is a video news report about the shutting down of this lemonade stand….




Sadly, this is not an isolated incident. In fact, this kind of thing is happening all over the nation. The following are some more examples….

*In Hazelwood, Missouri two young girls scouts have been permanently banned from selling girl scout cookies in the front yard of their own home. A neighbor ratted them out and the police swooped in rapidly to shut them down because the girls were violating a city ordinance that bans “the sale of commodities” from a home.

*Back in June, a lemonade stand run by some kids in Maryland that was raising money for a pediatric cancer charity was shut down and authorities originally slapped a $500 fine on their parents until bad publicity forced them to rescind the fine.

*In Tulare, California one little 7-year-old girl recently had her lemonade stand shut down by authorities because she did not have the proper business permits.

Unfortunately, this is just part of a larger trend. The more that government expands, the less liberty and freedom we are left with. Yes, there will always be a need for government, but our founding fathers intended for government to be much, much more limited than it is currently.

In Amerika today, if you want to do almost anything you must get the permission of the government to do it first. And usually you have to pay a fee for that permission.

For example, if you want to get married you have to get the permission of the government.

If you want to open a business, usually there is at least one license that you have to get, and in many areas there are several different kinds of licenses that you will have to apply for.

If you want to drive somewhere, you must have a license to drive, you must have your car registered, you must have your taxes paid and in many areas you must have one or more inspections of your vehicle done on a regular basis.

In fact, it is very difficult to think of anything that one can do (especially outside of a home) without the permission of the government.

In the United States today, we are being strangled by a never ending onslaught of laws, rules and regulations. Every single moment of every single day there are control freak bureaucrats out there that are dreaming up more rules and regulations to impose on us all.

Anyone that believes that this is still “the land of the free and the home of the brave” is delusional.

Today Amerika is a land of overwhelming bureaucracy where control freak politicians constantly tell us all how to live.

From the moment that our children enter school they are programmed to accept this system. In a previous article entitled “18 Signs That Life In U.S. Public Schools Is Now Essentially Equivalent To Life In U.S. Prisons“, I commented on how the nature of our public schools has fundamentally changed….

Sadly, life in many U.S. public schools is now essentially equivalent to life in U.S. prisons. Most parents don’t realize this, but our students have very few rights when they are in school. Our public school students are being watched, tracked, recorded, searched and controlled like never before. Back when I was in high school, it was unheard of for a police officer to come to school, but today our public school students are being handcuffed and arrested in staggering numbers. When I was young we would joke that going to school was like going to prison, but today that is actually true.

In previous times, Americans put up with a little bit of uncertainty and a little bit of danger because we wanted to live free.

But now we have all become so frightened and so cowardly that we are actually thankful when TSA officials feel up our private partsbecause we believe that somehow it is making us “safer”.

Many weak-minded Americans that love all of this “security” insist that if we don’t like how this nation is being turned into a prison then we should just leave.

Well, where in the world would we go? The sad reality is that the entire world has bought into this philosophy. In fact, there are many nations that are even worse than the United States is. I discussed this growing trend in a recent article entitled “32 Signs That The Entire World Is Being Transformed Into A Futuristic Big Brother Prison Grid“.

The entire globe is being transformed into a police state. Governments all over the planet are constantly figuring out new ways to more tightly control their populations. Everywhere you look, liberty and freedom are on the retreat. We are being told that it is for “our own good” and that more control will mean more “safety and security” for humanity.

But every totalitarian regime in history has ended badly. With all of the sophisticated technology that we have today, the ability to control people is potentially greater than ever before in history. As the world becomes a little bit more like a prison grid every single day, the potential for abuse grows. If someday all of this power gets into the wrong hands, it is going to be a nightmare unlike anything we have ever seen before.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/is-there-anythi ... ermission/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[moonwhim]

I intend to keep all the laws I consider to be constitutional and that support that principle of freedom in maintaining my rights and priviledges.

And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.
And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.

The doctrine in the Church that specifies that we should be law abiding citizens is conditional:

We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and crebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

I always emphasize "thus protected" too.

[ktg]

I intend to keep all the laws I consider to be constitutional and that support that principle of freedom in maintaining my rights and priviledges.

And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.
And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.
Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;
And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.

The doctrine in the Church that specifies that we should be law abiding citizens is conditional:

We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and crebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

My thoughts also. If a law doesn't fall in the above category, I evaluate the consequences of getting caught, but I feel no obligation to obey that law. I often say 'what they don't know won't hurt them'.

"Then do you profess to ignore the laws of the land? No; not unless they are unconstitutional, then I would do it all the time." John Taylor, _Journal of Discourses_, Vol. 11, p. 343-345, Delivered in the Tabernacle March 31st 1867

[gooseguy11]

Laws are just guidlines... Everything we do is contrary to some law somewhere, somehow. There are 2600 federal agencies making new "rules" that are somehow considered laws. By participating on this forum we could be considered terorist right wingers.

No, I do not intend on following all of the laws. (Don't tell anyone, I have chickens in a municipality that prohibits them.) GODS law are the only ones I can say I try to follow diligently. Mans laws are just that, mans laws. I try to be a good neighbor and good citizen, beyond that I feel I must do what is right in my mind. Law enforcement try to keep the peace, but ultimately they are human too, they make mistakes, they cannot enforce 1/10th of the laws out there.

[dauser]

The people created government and wanted it limited...The Constitution restricts government, not people.

Shifting personal responsibility to... government responsibility makes government grow... The publically assisted less moral sector of society has more time, energy and recources to get into trouble and thus require more, more laws and penelties to control them. Labor is not getting paid what it is worth because of the force charity public assistance draws against his paycheck is tempted to join the legal criminal class because if he tries to protect his paycheck from the immorals he too goes to jail.

The lower moral class coveting something for nothing... can't keep their mitts off the property of others....they want what government cannot morally provide.... public assistance, free education, housing, loans, social security, free lunch, bus rides, income tax credidts ect. and being too weak and coward to go next door and demand it from their neighbors... they expand government to go next door and do the take...for them.... to eat and consume what they do not own.

[Squally]

Do you intend to keep all of the governments commandment?

Yes, all of them..... :ymparty: :ymparty:

[Stephen]

Thank you for your thoughts. I agree with all that has been said. It's good to have you to help solidify my thoughts. I loved that John Taylor quote.

[Eddie Lyle]

I spent 10 years working in a state capital municipality as a code enforcement officer. A condition of that job was being a sworn police officer. In my experience at the local level the elected council had very little to do with writing laws and ordinances. It was always the city employees and bureaucrats that would put forth the ordinances and the council voted on them. I know because I wrote some of those laws and I fought hard to make sure that the ordinances that I wrote complied with the constitution. I also was very concerned with how I enforced the ordinances and always complied with the constitution to the detriment of my own personnel records ( I had a supervisor comment in my personnel file that I was unwilling to do my job because I would not carry out an illegal search) .

When the city council became a body of politicians that would do nothing, I got called into a meeting with all the department heads. This included the city attorney, police chief, city manager, and the heads of public works, urban development, community development, personnel, library, finance, ect… all the big bosses. My boss had brought me because I was the one who had written the ordinances in our department and would have a better understanding of what they planned to do. I sat in near stunned silence when they announced that they were going to propose a new city ordinance that would allow the bureaucrats in that room to develop their own laws that would circumnavigate around the elected officials. These are popular all over the country and are called administrative rules. These allowed the bureaucrats to effectively write their own laws without the consent of the people. Sure there are some token “safeguards” in place but for the most part a citizen of this city would have to be very aware what was going on in the city government to oppose any of the rules that would be put in place. The city council acted almost relieved that the bureaucrats would be in charge of this and voted it right in.

Next the bureaucrats decided to forgo the elected municipal judge because “the judge is over burdened” with cases. The muni judge hears traffic citations (numerous) and whatever code enforcement brought in (which in reality was not a lot.) But bureaucrats know better and they wrote and convinced the council to pass a new ordinance that worked with the new administrative rules to bypass citations and start to issue administrative penalties that consisted of fines that were four times the amount of citations. The people could only fight these penalties if they found that the department that assessed them did something that was technically wrong on the penalty assessment form itself or they believed the wrong penalty had been assessed. Also hearings bypassed the elected judge and instead relied on a city paid hearings officer which was an attorney from out of town. I still remember the first and only hearing I went to. The defendant brought his city councilor to defend himself. I had to point out to the councilor at the hearing that the whole process that he was protesting was implemented by him and that he had affirmatively voted for it.

I can’t point to any one group of individuals or organizations that are running some sort of cabal to pass an extraordinary amount of local rules and regulations and administrative rules. It is instead, I believe, an ideology that goes against our inalienable rights. This ideology and those who follow it either willingly or mistakenly ignorantly believes that the government is the final authority and its job is to regulate every aspect of your life to protect you from yourself. It believes you as a person have no sense at all. It believes that children under the supervision of their parents are going to make a lemonade (made from municipal water supplies, and FDA approved commodities) that may be hazardous to your health. It believes that because of the made out of thin air zoning ordinances and rules that a child’s stand is equitable to a scrap yard or tannery in a residential neighborhood. It believes you are stupid enough to not know the difference between drinking poison and drinking lemonade. It believes you are also stupid enough to not know the difference between a child’s weekend stand and converting your home to a 7-11.

Some of the reasons I left last year was because I got fed up with what I was witnessing and because I saw that my common sense application of the ordinances and rules was being compromised as was my integrity. It was not worth it to me anymore.

As to the original post of whether we should keep laws we find ridiculous… it depends on how much you are willing to fight. For example the state where I live limits speed limits to 65mph. The legislature passed a bill and it was signed to raise it to 70. The bureaucrats said no and it remains 65. I obey local speed limits in populated areas. On the freeway it is a different story. I keep it reasonable and prudent but I deliberately choose to break that law. I am also willing to fight a citation if I get one.

Another person I know had 3 chickens in her yard. She didn’t think anything of it. The neighbors did because they flew the coop and were always in their yard. She received citations; thousands of dollars in citations because she refused to obey the city ordinance. She joined a group that sought to change the ordnance and after a yearlong fight they were successful. She still had to pay thousands in fines.

So I think it just depends on your level of tolerance. If your community’s tolerance of stupid and or unconstitutional laws and rules is high they will remain in place. If your community’s tolerance of stupid and or unconstitutional laws and rules is low change will take place. I think in most cases unfortunately the former is more likely than the latter.
Eddie

[creator]

‎"Then do you profess to ignore the laws of the land?' No; not unless they are unconstitutional, then I would do it all the time..."

Source: John Taylor

[Moss Man]

Eddie,

Did you have any experiences with Agenda 21 or ICLEI in your city? How about Urban Renewal?

[Zkulptor]

‎"Then do you profess to ignore the laws of the land?' No; not unless they are unconstitutional, then I would do it all the time..."

Source: John Taylor

Awesome, and well Stated brother Taylor!

[Eddie Lyle]

Moss Man,
Our city didn't join ICLEI though plenty around the state did. Urban Renewal seperated from Community Development(planning, building and safety,airport, code enforcement, neighborhood relations, youth programs, human rights) and became it's own department, they focus mostly on distributing federal grants and run the housing programs among other socialist programs. I only dealt with them peripherally.
Eddie

[Ben McClintock]

http://www.mormonchronicle.com/sacred-c ... tter-what/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

John Taylor: “I defy the United States. I will obey the will of God. These are my sentiments, and all of you who sympathize with me in this position raise your right hand.”

[lundbaek]

I believe the Articles of Faith, including the 13th Article of Faith, are not commandments, but rather a statement of beliefs. The statement of the 13th Article of Faith is, I believe, further clarified by a few verses in D&C 98:4-7, which place a major condition on our obligation to support just any law.

Verse 4 tells us that our foremost obligation is to obey the Lord, and not just any law per se.

Verse 5 gives us conditional justification to give allegiance to law, but limited to the condition that it meet not just constittional muster, but also that it supports the principles of fundamental rights of all people. That is an important caveat against, for example, accepting modern legal interpretations for allowing socialism in the welfare clause of the Constitution.

Verse 6 justifies us in befriending the law, but only if it is constitutional. It sets up a higher standard that allegiance to law must meet.