FEDERAL ENTITLEMENTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO CHRISTIANS
In the past chapter, I’ve provided proof that Social
Security would be unconstitutional if it was a trust fund.
In another chapter I’ll prove that it is only available to
indigents, but first I’ll explain why, so that you will understand that IT
CANNOT BE OTHERWISE.
Your Constitution does not allow government to provide
ordinary people with entitlements such as welfare or Social Security
benefits. It is not a
government function to provide entitlements to people.
It is not a government function to take care of people.
Nor is there any authorized source of funds to take care of people,
nor can civil servants receive a paycheck for performing such
non-governmental services. And
indeed, your Government does not give entitlements to ordinary people.
ORDINARY PEOPLE CANNOT QUALIFY FOR FEDERAL BENEFITS.
Again: it is not a
government function to provide entitlements to people.
When your Constitution was being considered for
ratification by the State Senates, some people were suspicious of the
"general welfare" clause and tried to claim that these two words
could authorize any kind of welfare. The
general welfare clause in Article 1, Section 8 of your Constitution reads:
“The Congress shall have Power to ... provide for the common Defence and
general Welfare of the United States;...”
It is an introductory phrase which is followed, after a semi-colon,
by a specific list of the 17 things the new government would be authorized
to do, such as; to establish post offices, coin money, make treaties,
establish standard weights and measures, provide for a Navy, punish pirates,
punish counterfeiting, fund a temporary army, declare war, and exercise
exclusive jurisdiction over all cases in the future District of Columbia.,
To counter those rumors that the general welfare clause
in the proposed Constitution would authorize any kind of welfare, James
Madison, in Federalist Paper #41, explained its clear intent. He stated that it "is an absurdity" to claim that
the General Welfare clause confounds or misleads, because this introductory
clause is followed by enumeration of specific particulars that explain and
qualify the meaning of phrase "general welfare".
That's right! YOUR
CONSTITUTION WAS RATIFIED UNDER THE ASSURANCE THAT IT WOULD NEVER BE
INTERPRETED TO PROVIDE WELFARE TO INDIVIDUALS.
And it has not. And
indeed, to this very day, your US government can not and does not provide
entitlements to ordinary Americans. Here
is the catch: The ONLY way to qualify for entitlements, such as welfare or
Social Security, is to become a ward of a foreign authority.
The US government administers their program as their agent.
SOCIAL SECURITY AND WELFARE REMAIN CONSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE ORDINARY
AMERICANS CANNOT QUALIFY FOR ENTITLEMENTS.
The Supreme Court says, 92 US 551:
"It is the natural consequence of a citizenship which owes
allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both.
The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted
himself to such a form of government."
Congress cannot appropriate funds for entitlements to
Americans. No one who swears an
oath to uphold the Constitution can lawfully spend funds for any
entitlement. Government funds
can only be spent for legitimate purposes.
In 1792 President James Madison vetoed a congressional
appropriation to assist refugees. He
undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted
a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of
President Franklin Pierce in 1854 vetoed a bill to help
the mentally ill. He said “I
cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity.... [this]
would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and
subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is
In 1897, President Grover Cleveland vetoed an
appropriation to provide disaster aid to victims of a Texas drought.
His veto stated: "I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the
plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the
appropriation of public funds... I find no warrant for such an appropriation
in the Constitution. The lesson
should be constantly enforced that though the people should support the
government, the government should not support the people."
AND IT DOESN'T. And
indeed, to this very day, YOUR US GOVERNMENT CAN NOT AND DOES NOT PROVIDE
ENTITLEMENTS TO ORDINARY PEOPLE.
Conclusion #1, welfare is prohibited by your
constitution. IT HAS NEVER BEEN
A GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTION TO HELP PEOPLE
Jesus Christ said in Luke 22
: "... they that exercise authority upon them are called
prohibits Christians from associating with freeloaders.
Those who manage themselves will not accept socialist
benefits. Christians will not
force others to pay for their retirement.
Those who accept benefits do so only by a pledge of allegiance to a
worldly master. Perhaps
you’ve chosen the wrong provider.
Another interesting document is President Cleveland's
June 21, 1886 veto of military pensions.
His veto blasted into politicians because a pension would "urge
honest men to become dishonest." And
he refused to pass such a "demoralizing lesson". Military pensions were dishonest in 1886.
Federal pensions are still dishonest today.
If earned pensions are dishonest, how depraved are those who think of
unearned welfare as honest?
Conclusion #2, pensions are prohibited by your
By the way, The Federalist Papers are not just some
antiquated editorial opinions, they are, according to the Supreme Court in
Cohen v. Virginia (6 Wheat), the exact record of the intent of the
Constitution (also see Coleman v. Miller).
Just in case you think a law or an amendment changed
the intent of your Constitution, Think again.
A congressman cannot swear an oath to support and defend your
constitution and then suggest an amendment to change something that he is
sworn to perpetuate.
If you don't believe me, perhaps you can believe the
U.S. Supreme Court in S. Carolina v. US, 199 US 437 (1905):
Constitution is a written instrument. As
such, its meaning does not alter. That
which it meant when it was adopted, it means now..."
Busser v. Snyder, 37 ALR 1515:
“An Old Age
Assistance Law is prohibited by a constitutional provision that no
appropriation shall be made for charitable or benevolent purposes to any
Conclusion #3, Old Age Assistance is prohibited by your
Also in the Busser case:
‘poor,’ as used by lawmakers, describes those who are destitute and
helpless, unable to support themselves, and without means of support.”
I want you to remember the legal definition of the term
“poor” from this Busser case. Destitute,
helpless, unable to support themselves, without means of support.
Later on, I will show that this is entirely consistent with the poor
laws. If you cannot take
care of yourself, others are allowed to take care of you, even if you
don’t like it. John 21:18.
Hint: since Social Security is only available to those who need
federal benefits, your confession is sufficient to prove that you cannot
take care of yourself.
Your constitution has not changed. WELFARE, PENSIONS AND OLD AGE ASSISTANCE REMAIN
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Such things
are not within the realm of the United states government, they must remain
foreign. The only way to get
such assistance is to become a ward of a foreign authority.
The US Secretary of the Treasury, as the agent of your foreign
masters, will administer the foreign program with “actions, regulations,
rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter
taken...” pursuant to Title 12 United States Code, section 95(b)
. The Secretary of the Treasury is the very same multinational
authority that issues Social Security Cards.
Yet social security and welfare remain legal.
Here is a history of what is really going on:
The funds for social security, welfare, housing,
disaster relief, and now terrorist attack relief, come from the foreign
authorities who loan us the national debt.
These funds are not delegated by Congress, but by treaties and trusts
administered by the President. In
1933, the US government was threatened by financial emergencies that
threatened legitimate constitutional duties.
Instead of resorting to direct taxes to collect funds, as was allowed
by the Constitution, it went bankrupt.
When the government declared bankruptcy in 1933, it was put under the
control of a receivership governed by its creditors.
The government provided a (still ongoing) public emergency to
administer foreign funds borrowed from the receivership. The US has a duty
to secure the assets and income of the federal government as collateral for
its creditors. Federal lands
were already mortgaged, so the federal government had to secure more
collateral as surety on the country’s debts.
The only assets remaining were the labor of federal people.
The US government now uses the labor of its numbered people to secure
its debts. To secure the pledge
to the creditors, the US has a duty to manage and protect these assets, keep
them healthy, and provide for their welfare and enforce their obligations.
More details will be provided later.
|Here is an anti-welfare anti-tax quote
from Abraham Lincoln: "You cannot strengthen the weak by
weakening the strong. You cannot help small men by tearing down big
men. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot lift
the wage earner by tearing down the wage payer. You cannot keep out of
trouble by spending more than your income. You cannot help men
permanently by doing for them what they could and should do