Requirement for Consent

are making an “appearance” within. Instead, the only choice they give you is to write a blank check that lets the judge do 1 whatever the HELL he wants and then demand that you BEND OVER in front of him every time the judge gets a hard on in 2 front of you. This is: 3 1. Religious idolatry, where the judge had supernatural powers that no human being is permitted to have. 4 2. Total hypocrisy. 5 3. A complete denial of equal protection and equal treatment that is the foundation of our system of jurisprudence. See: 6 Requirement for Equal Protection and Equal Treatment , Form #05.033 http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm Hence, there is no such thing as a “voluntary appearance” or “voluntary consent” to the jurisdiction of a specific court. 7 Instead, the court behaves as a franchise and the government behaves as a “parens patriae” pagan deity that has supernatural 8 powers. In effect, all courts amount to the establishment of a state sponsored religion in violation of the First Amendment 9 in which: 10 1. The object of worship is the collective majority within a democracy and COMMERCIAL BENEFITS rather than the 11 INDIVIDUAL and his/her INALIENABLE rights. 12 2. Franchise contract behaves as the equivalent of a state sponsored bible. 13 3. “Worship” is the equivalent of obeying the franchise contract and admitting one is a privileged franchisee such as a 14 statutory “taxpayer”, “driver”, “U.S. citizen”, “U.S. person”, etc. 15 4. The judge is the priest. 16 5. The court is a church building. 17 6. The altar is the judge's bench. 18 7. The “well” in the courtroom and the door into the well is the method by which you consent to the worship service and 19 join the church. 20 8. “Worship services” are hearings in court. 21 9. When worship services are held, human sacrifices are made and YOU and your otherwise PRIVATE PROPERTY are 22 the human being sacrificed. 23 10. Licensed attorneys are the “deacons” who conduct the worship services. 24 11. The deacons are “ordained” by the chief priests in the state sponsored church called the “Supreme Court”, which is 25 really the church headquarters. 26 12. Those who attempt to preserve and protect their absolute equality in relation to the government running the court by 27 any of the following means are maliciously penalized, harassed, sanctioned, and discriminated against: 28 12.1. Invoking the common law and equity rather than statute law. Recall that all civil statutory law is law for 29 government and not private persons. See: 30 Why Statutory Civil Law is Law for Government and Not Private Persons , Form #05.037 http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm 12.2. Challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case because they are not lawfully participating in a 31 government franchise and do not and cannot consent to participate. 32 13. Those who refuse to JOIN the church by either NOT participating in government franchises and/or NOT making an 33 “appearance” are subjected to the equivalent of commercial genocide. They are deprived of the ability to function 34 commercially by not being issued ID and not being able to petition the CHURCH court. 35

Below is an example where the U.S. Supreme Court identified itself and all courts as a “benefit” and therefore a franchise: 36

Chief Justice Marshall had long before observed in Rose v. Himely, 4 Cranch, 241, 269, 2 L.Ed. 608, 617, that, upon principle, the operation of every judgment must depend on the power of the court to render that judgment. In Williamson v. Berry, 8 How. 495, 540, 12 L.Ed. 1170, 1189, it was said to be well settled that the jurisdiction of any court exercising authority over a subject 'may be inquired into in every other court when the proceedings in the former are relied upon and brought before the latter by a party claiming the benefit [franchise] of such proceedings,' and that the rule prevails whether 'the decree or judgment has been given in a court of admiralty, chancery, ecclesiastical court, or court of common law, or whether the point ruled has arisen under the laws of nations, the practice in chancery, or the municipal laws of states. ' In his Commentaries on the Constitution, Story, 1313, referring to Mills v. Duryee, 7 Cranch, 481, 484, 3 L.Ed. 411, 413, and to the constitutional requirement as to the faith and credit to be given to the records and judicial proceedings of a state, said: "But this does not prevent an inquiry into the jurisdiction of the court in which the original judgment was given, to pronounce it; or the right of the state itself to exercise authority over the person or the subject-matter. The Con- [204 U.S. 8, 17] stitution did not mean to

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

Requirement for Consent

140 of 396

Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org Form 05.003, Rev. 7-23-2013

EXHIBIT:________