The U.S. Constitution (USC) Sucks, The New Articles of Confederation (NAC) is Better: Part 5 of an Open Debate—The NAC’s Family Sections

Article III.

Section 2.

Neither the united States in Congress assembled, nor any State, shall have power to raise up a king over men, nor to exert kingly authority over them or their house, for it is not right to esteem one flesh above another, or that one man shall think himself above another, but every man alone shall bear rule in his own house; and as that which is governed by law is also preserved by law, whereas that which breaks a law, and abides not by law, but seeks to become a law unto itself, cannot be preserved by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment, every man shall have power to set his house in order, having his children and house in subjection to him alone with all gravity, even as unto a king, according to the bounds and conditions of his law, that this shall be a land of liberty, and that every man shall enjoy his rights and privileges alike, and that every man shall set in order his family, and that every man shall bear his part.

Section 4.

Neither Congress, nor any State, shall abridge, or regulate in any way, a woman’s right to give birth at home, with our without assistance.

Section 5.

No State, nor any of its agents, shall issue or keep certificates of live birth, except in cases in which the child’s mother has died giving birth and the child has no living relative, for only the father and mother of a child, or the father alone if the child’s mother has died giving birth, or the mother alone if the father is dead or otherwise absent, or some other living relative if the child’s parents are dead or otherwise absent, shall have power to issue certificates of live birth, and to keep the same, except in the case in which the child’s mother has died giving birth and the child has no living relative, and such certificates shall be as equally valid and effective and binding, in the eyes of the law, as those which are issued by any State or its agents.

Section 6.

In order that the people may be instructed more perfectly in theory, in principle, in doctrine, in the law, and in all things that are expedient to understand—of things both in the heavens above and in the earth beneath, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are; things which are at home, things which are abroad; the wars and perplexities of nations, and a knowledge also of countries and of kingdoms—and that all the people may study and learn, and become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues and people; the right and duty of parents to teach their children at home shall not be abridged, nor regulated in any way, neither by any State, nor by Congress, nor by any other branch of government, that children may be brought up in, and taught, truth and words of wisdom out of the best books, by their parents, and that the people may organize themselves and prepare every needful thing, and that every home may be established as a house of learning; but parents shall also have the privilege of performing this duty by sending their children to a school.

Section 7.

Neither Congress, nor any State, shall assign a number to the name or person of any of the inhabitants of Confederacy lands.

As explained in my previous post, the NAC creates a new (really an old) jurisdiction by re-introducing (restoring) the ancient concept of manus, so that a married man now has his own law:

Article III. Section 3.

No State shall have power to divorce men who exercise their right to marry wives with manus, from their wives, nor shall the right and power of such men to issue a writ of divorcement, on their own authority, be abridged or regulated in any way, and such writs shall be binding and valid and final and unalterable decrees in the eyes of the law, so that the law shall view a wife so divorced as loosed from the law of her husband.

This makes the man a legislator.  All government has three branches: legislative, executive and judicial.  The national government established by the USC has these three branches which are separated, but the new jurisdiction created by the NAC restores the ancient concept of men as kings.

The NAC’s Article III. Section 2.

From the dictionary, a king is “a male monarch of a major territorial unit; especially :  one whose position is hereditary and who rules for life.”  Under the NAC, men become minor kings, or male monarchs of a minor territorial unit, namely, over their house and family.  As kings, they have both legislative, executive and judicial powers.  Thus, Section 2 says, “every man alone shall bear rule in his own house,” and “every man shall have power to set his house in order,” and “every man shall set in order his family,” which clauses embody executive and judicial powers, while the clause, “according to the bounds and conditions of his law” shows that he also has legislative power.

This is yet another restoration, for from the very beginning men were made kings.  But as the NAC puts restraints on all levels of government, even the fundamental level of a man’s house law is said to have “bounds and conditions,” thus allowing an interaction between the fundamental law of a man and the laws of society in general.  This is important, for tyrants can appear anywhere, but all men are re-empowered by the NAC, as men were from the beginning, to reign over their house and family, and over their children in particular, to judge them, and to make laws for them, and to set them in order, using his executive power, being endowed with those masculine powers and strengths that actually allow him to subdue and subject whatsoever is around him.  As I stated in a previous comment concerning rebellion, this duty to deal with rebellion falls principally upon fathers, and should fathers become emasculated to the point where they can no longer subject their children (as it is today under the USC), society must crumble into a mob of criminals.

The NAC, then, deals with criminality at the fundamental level, by re-empowering the men, and fathers in particular, so that everyone that leaves his or her father’s house will have learned to respect the laws of society, having already been made subject to their father’s law.  Under the USC, criminality is fostered, for fathers are emasculated, creating rebellion and dissent in their house, and it is the police state which then has the responsibility of dealing with these now rebellious adults who do not respect any authority, at all.

Just as I stated in the first post of this series, concerning the super-armed citizens becoming a sort of unofficial police force, even so the men and fathers of society, under the NAC, are likewise empowered to police their own, even as kings.  There are very valid reasons why God has endowed men with all that they have been given, meaning all the incredible physical strength and prowess and mental powers.  These things are needed, in order for them to set their families in order and deal with whatsoever obstacles come their way.  It is to the benefit of society as a whole that such powers are returned to men, therefore, the NAC restores them.

And the NAC doesn’t mince words, either, using the phrase “even as unto a king” to describe the subjection that children are supposed to have to their fathers.  But kings over men are expressly prohibited.  And even kingly authority over men is prohibited.

Now, certainly we Americans can claim we have no king over men, but there can be no doubt that kingly authority is being exerted over them and their house.  Currently men can be hauled off to jail for a great many things if they seek to set in order their house.  And the State is increasingly interested and seeking to control all aspects of a family and house, so that the State becomes the parent or father.  The NAC does away entirely with these tyrannical power grabs, but without leaving a vacuum.  No, in the absence of false State “fatherly” powers, the real fathers are given back the powers the State stole from them in the first place.  So, the NAC shows itself superior, yet again, to the USC.

The NAC’s Article III. Sections 4-6.

The State’s stolen “fatherly” powers, inappropriately called by people, “the nanny State,” currently reach (or try to reach) into all levels and areas  of the family.  Without going into a lengthy discussion on the topic, the first two sentences of the entry of Communism from the New World Encyclopedia are instructive:

Communism refers to a theory for revolutionary change and political and socioeconomic organization based on common control of the means of production as opposed to private ownership. While communism or Marxism-Leninism, as it is known, champions economic justice, it views social revolution and the violent overthrow of the existing social order as essential components in the process.

So, the State seeks, in a very great many instances, to control everything it can, including the family itself, by these stolen masculine powers.  Children, then, are not viewed as belonging to parents (“private ownership”), but to “society,” which the above entry calls “common control” (meaning the State.)  Those children are fodder for the State organism.  They represent both future taxpayers and future soldiers.  Thus, knowledge about the children of America, and about Americans in general, is needed by the State, in order to plan for the future.  Specifically, it needs to know how many people are in America, and how many are men and how many are women and what their ages are, and when they were born and so on and so forth.  This information is vital to the growth of every State that wishes to control all things.

The NAC combats the tyranny of central control of all things by restoration, restoring to parents their private rights over their children, and also by prohibition, prohibiting the State from knowing much of anything, and also by disclosure, causing the State to disclose all its business to the people.  In other words, it essentially says to the State, “I know what evil is in your hearts and what you are planning in secret places, and it ain’t gonna work.”  It supplies to the people a set of tools that completely undermine such tendencies toward consolidation of State power.

The State wants to know how many births there are in this country, and how many are boys and how many are boys.  The NAC says, “Women have the right to home birth, even without an assistant, and you, State, can’t regulate this.”  This keeps the State completely in the dark concerning these numbers, for there are a great many home births in this country, but if there is no assistant, there is no one to report to the State these numbers.  The State, then cannot get an accurate handle on births, because of Section 4 of Article III.

“But,” says the State, “many people go to hospitals, therefore, there we will get the rest of the numbers, so we can have some accurate projections for our secret plans.”  But Section 5 stops the agents of the State from keeping birth certificates, except in rare cases, as stated in the Section, therefore the State is once again left in the dark.  As it should be.

“Ah, but when the children go to school, then we will know the numbers!” says the State.  Well, not really, because parents have a right to homeschool their kids, per Section 6, and that also can’t be regulated, so it sucks to be you, State, but the NAC has stopped you yet again.

What ends up happening, then, is the State is left with inaccurate numbers and a lot of guesswork.  But what about the enumeration that is supposed to occur every 10 years?  Surely that is where the State will gets its handle on the numbers, right?  The U.S. Census Bureau to the rescue!  Unfortunately for the State, the NAC says this:

The Number of Representatives in the House shall ever be no less than Four Hundred Ninety. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct, but as all population enumerations pose a danger to the lives, liberty and property of the people, all such enumerations shall consist solely of the whole number of inhabitants, and of the number of said inhabitants which are Indians not taxed, and of the number of non-Indians not taxed which are males aged twenty years or older, and in no case shall names, or sexes, or ages, or citizenship statuses, or any other data be gathered in the enumeration. At all times, regardless of enumeration, each State shall have at Least one Representative.

Yet again, the State is stopped in its march towards centralization of power and war, by taking away its power to actually know anything much about the people.  (And in case anyone is wondering, yes, I did have Monty Python’s Holy Hand Grenade scene from their Holy Grail movie in mind when I wrote the above paragraph of the NAC: )

“Ah, but what about driver’s licenses?” you might ask.  “Everyone uses a car to drive around, right?  That is how they’ll get the numbers!”  Well, as explained in the previous post, the State can’t license the right to travel under the NAC, either, so driver’s licenses are out, too.

The NAC’s Article III. Sections 7.

Now, Section 7 stops the State from assigning a number to people.  So, if the State tries to use the records of the previous national government, or some other means that the NAC hasn’t thought of, to get around all these restrictions, they still can’t attach a number to a name or person.  It is really hard to keep track of a population if you can’t put a unique number to each person.  So, I wish any State that tries to do so the best of luck.

The result of these sections

The NAC’s family sections firmly establish the family as the fundamental unit of society and the father as the fundamental governmental unit.  The NAC, then, fulfills the imperative of The Family: A Proclamation to the World, “to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”  The USC, in contrast, is silent on all these topics, and under it, all we have seen is “the violent overthrow of the existing social order” (the family unit and its government.)  Under the USC, the family has been broken apart and re-defined and its government has been fully disMANtled.  Women empowered by the strong arm of the State, as well as the State (for the State empowers no one without strings attached), now “govern” the family, which allows children to grow up in rebellion, following in the footsteps of their rebellious mothers, all with State sanction and approval, (for the destruction of the family is one of the not-so-secret plans), and emasculated fathers and husbands, unable to deal with the State’s strong arm, are beginning to become wise to the situation and are “opting out.”  But State deception has men completely fooled and so the angst and frustration these men feel is directed at the usurping women, and not at the State which falsely empowers them with stolen masculine rights and authority.  Men must wake up and see the deception around them.  They must recognize that women are not to blame, for they are simply following after their natures, as they always have.  It is the false empowerment of the State that is the primary cause of the situation.  The State must be emasculated and the stolen powers returned to their rightful owners: the men.  But this is impossible under the USC.  So the USC must go and in its place the NAC will restore both the family and its original and legitimate government.

Now, for those who take issue with the NAC over the establishment, or re-establishment of men over their families, as kings, it must be understood that from the beginning, from the very first family, and onward, the fundamental governmental unit has always been, and ever shall be, the king over his kingdom.  Not a democracy, not a confederacy, not a republic, or anything else.  All these other forms of government were later inventions.    The first and best form of government has always been the just king:

Therefore, if it were possible that you could have just men to be your kings, who would establish the laws of God, and judge this people according to his commandments, yea, if ye could have men for your kings who would do even as my father Benjamin did for this people—I say unto you, if this could always be the case then it would be expedient that ye should always have kings to rule over you.  (Mosiah 29:13)

I will not expound this principle in this post.  Suffice it to say that for the fundamental unit of society, which is the family, the father-king is the original and best form of family government, and, in point of fact, the only divinely approved form for that unit.  The NAC, then, abolishes one form of government, (the national government under the USC), and replaces it with a multitude of father-kings, which is a restoration, for from the beginning the world was filled up with father-kingdoms.  At the same time, the NAC prohibits the later invention of “king over men” and also the even later invention of “kingly authority over men,” while allowing the States to continue functioning as democratic republics on the macro level and as a Confederacy between States.  The NAC allows these because they do not interfere with the rights of the fundamental units and governments, whereas “king over men” and governments which exert “kingly authority over men” do interfere.  Thus, every part of the NAC supports that principle of freedom which maintains rights and privileges.

A story

Once upon a time, there was a land of many kings, which bordered a forest infested with ogres.  The forest also contained a unique specimen of antelope, whose antlers only grew on the right side of their heads.  In ancient times the kings discovered that if they ate these animals, they became endowed with mighty strength, and so it became a practice among them to corral all the various types of this specific specimen of antelope in a certain place in the forest and from time to time the kings would feast on them to renew their strength.  The ogres, for their part, craved human flesh and would attack the kings when the urge struck them, but the kings would ever be victorious due to their greater strength.  In these wars, here and there a king would fall, while ogres would die in droves.

Now ogres were always very stupid, but one day a new type of smart ogre was born, and when he came of age, he said to his fellows, “Listen to me and I will deliver all the humans into our hands.  Behold, it is unwise to attack the humans in their strength.  They must first be weakened.”

“How?” asked his brother.

“Behold, the antelope is the source of the kings’ strength.  We will steal the antelope and men will become weak,” replied the wise ogre.

“But they will know they are missing and will attack us and slay us and take the animals back,” said another.

The smart ogre continued, “They will not know, for they are not numbered, and so we will wait until dark, and when their watch is sleeping, we will take but one antelope, a small one, even the smallest we can find, and we will bring it back and raise it among us as our own.  They will think it has run off and, being insignificant, not worth the effort to retrieve it.  Thus, they will begin to become weak.  We will wait an entire year…”

“A whole year?” exclaimed a stupid ogre.

“Yes, a whole year, and in that year’s time they will begin to forget they ever had it.  None of us will attack them during this time, but we will wait a year and then we will steal another small antelope from them, of the same kind, and we will breed the two we have, to make more for us.”

“But what for?” asked a bewildered ogre.

The cunning ogre continued, “Once we have bred a sufficient number to sustain a population, we will feast upon our antelopes as the humans do.  This will make us stronger.”

“Antelope tastes gross!” exclaimed an ogre.

“It is an acquired taste,” continued the genius ogre, “and we will grow to like it.  Using this same strategy, each year we will take one more small antelope, and breed, and feast, and wait for man to forget all about the animals we will have stolen, and we will afflict him with peace, so that he doesn’t even realize how weak he has become and how strong we have become, and he will no longer see the need for the antelope.  And thus, when we have stolen everything, and feasted, we will attack anew and feast on sweet human flesh!”

And so the ogres put their plan into effect, and became very successful at stealing the antelope.  From time to time a king here or there would notice that the antelope were missing and that the now peaceful ogres were ten feet taller than they used to be, and would sound an alarm that the kings were now weak and in danger, but because it was a time of peace, no one paid any attention.

One day, however, a wife of a king had a chance meeting in the forest with the cunning ogre, and as they talked she began to complain about all the work she did while her husband did nothing but boss her and the children around, and how she would love to give him a taste of his own medicine and rule over him!  The ogre agreed how unfair and unequal it all was and offered to set things right.  Later that night the wise ogre called another ogre meeting and said, “The plans have changed slightly.  Instead of attacking the humans from the forest, and have to deal with their strongholds, we will attack them from within their cities and lands.”  And he unfolded to them the new plan.

The next day all the ogres walked into the human cities, denouncing human inequality, and declaring that the gores, as impartial and unbiased entities, could set human affairs in order better than the humans themselves, and so the ogres ought to be put in charge.  Not everyone was convinced at first, but soon the majority agreed that the plan seemed fair and the ogres began to rule over the humans.  In time, their reach invaded all areas of human life and the kings soon realized that they were no longer kings, but servants and slaves to the ogres.  Anytime one of their wives or children complained to the ogres about them, the ogres would side with the wives and children and lock the king away, to be devoured secretly by the ogres.  In this way, the ogres had a steady supply of sweet human flesh to feast upon from time to time, without a single ogre casualty.

The women and children did not care what happened to their kings, for the ogres let them have their way, something the kings never did, but, despite the new freedoms offered by the ogres, neither the women, nor the children, were happy.  In fact, happiness was at an all time low, for everyone, (except the ogres).  The women resented the fact that their previously mighty king-husbands, who used to slay ogres for breakfast, were now pushed around by both ogres, women and children.  The children resented the fact that their previously mighty king-fathers, who used to have stuffed ogre trophies in their dens, were now made the servant of all.  The women and children all secretly desired that their husbands and fathers could and would return to their former strength and authority, but they had become addicted to power and had grown accustomed to the lifestyle afforded by the ogres, in which they could do whatever they wanted, like spoiled brats, and so none voiced these secret desires, but all continued on living out their lives in unhappiness, and blaming the former kings for all their misery.

The men, on the other hand, were also miserable, and put the blame on their wives and upon women, in general, for the women had changed from their former submissive state to a contentious one, in which the ogres were used to threaten the kings into submitting to the women and children.

About the time of the secret great feast, which was when the cunning ogre had planned to throw off the façade and eat up not only most of the men, but also many of the women and children, something new came into the cities of men.  It was an idea from the past, concerning the antelopes.  It spoke about how in the distant past men were mighty kings because of the antelope and how the ogres had stolen the animals, etc., exposing the whole affair exactly as it had actually happened.  It also put forth a plan whereby men could go into the forest, find the antelope, feast upon it, and return to the cities re-empowered, to throw down the rule of the ogres and re-enthrone themselves as kings of their wives and children.  It even had a map showing exactly where the ogres were keeping all the antelope.  Just a short journey to the spot and all the oppressions and unhappiness would end in an instant.

Most men, at first, upon hearing of this new thing, were skeptical.  “It cannot be that easy,” was everyone’s thought.  “How could feasting on an antelope fix the situation?”  But those who believed the plan persisted until everyone was convinced of its truth: the antelope was the key.  An army of men was gathered, forming a majority, all convinced, and they went to the spot on the map.  Sure enough, the antelope were there.  But would these animals give the men their former strength?  The men feasted, hoping the plan would work, then returned to the cities to fight the ogres.  In the ensuing battle, here and there a king fell, but the ogres were killed in droves, as before, only this time the ogres were made almost entirely extinct, the few remaining stragglers fleeing back into the forest.  Having re-established their kingdoms, the kings ordered the antelopes moved into each city, where they could be properly guarded and protected and numbered, never again to be lost to ogres.

Final words

Once again, more sections of the NAC show its superiority to the USC.  Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post. Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate. And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

To read the other parts of this series, click any of these links:

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,

Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10,

Part 11, Part 12, Part 13.

Also see: The New Articles of Confederation (NAC) and The Right to Abolish, Revert and Replace Amendment.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist


1 Comment

  1. Someone asked me about men conferring children upon their children and why only men could do it under the NAC. The answer is that under the NAC manus exists over all children, as it did anciently. Thus, a man rules over his children, because they are in his power and belong to him. This is yet another restoration, for anciently all children were “the children of men,” and not “the children of women.” It is the principle of the land and the plant. A conversation I had with my youngest son went something like, “Where do plants come from? From the ground?” “No, Daddy, from seeds.” “And where do the seeds come from?” “From plants.” “So, plants come from other plants?” “Yep. The ground is just dirt.” Life comes from the seed, which proceeds from the seed bearer, who is always male. It would be improper to say that the plant proceeds from or belongs to the ground. The plant belongs to whomever planted that seed there. Thus, the ancients never saw children as belonging to their mother, but to their father, for the mother was the soil into which the father planted his seed, producing the child. This is why the Lord refers to men of Israel as His pleasant plant. And so on. I won’t expound the whole thing in this comment.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s