14
Nov

C$=Peonage

   Posted by:AUDIOMIND


Share and Enjoy

    If anyone can prove me wrong……please do!

    http://www.answers.com/topic/peonage

    Labor in a condition of servitude to extinguish a debt (the holding of any person to service or labor under the system known as peonage is abolished and forever prohibited – U.S. Code)

    Let me elaborate…..

    Courts rule that Child Support is not a debt.
    Courts rule that Child Support is an obligation.
    Courts rule that Child Support is not enforced by contract.
    Courts rule that failure to pay Child Support is enforced by “Contempt of Court.”

    Those found in contempt of court, in effect, temporarily give up their US citizenship, and do not have ANY constitutional rights. Contempt of Court negates ALL constitutional rights, immunities and protections. In most cases, due process and a right to legal representation and a host of other rights do not apply.

    How can one enforce a contract under these conditions?

    If C$ is, indeed, a gift, then there would be neither an obligation to pay, nor recriminations for not paying.

    Actually, if you look at it, the requirement that you report where you live, where you work, and how much you make, could be considered peonage. Requiring that I pay my ex for doing a job, amounts to her being in my employ. If she’s not doing the job to my specifications, I have the right to fire her.

    If I do not have the right to fire her, as every other employer would have(not to mention the tax breaks), then it can’t be a voluntary situation.

    In essence C$ is being forced, since not paying can land you in jail, loss of license, etc… And paying her regardless of what kind of job she’s doing, would mean that I’m being forced to pay her. This also amounts to forced labor, which is the very definition of peonage.

    ……and to beat it all……>>>

    US Constitution [including state constitution and/or laws that specifically states similar 'rules']:
    http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

    Rules regarding the ‘Imprisonment for Debts’


    Amendment V

    “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, …………., nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

    AND


    Imprisonment for debt.

    “There shall be no imprisonment for debt in this State, except in cases of fraud.”

    Tags:

    This entry was posted on Monday, November 14th, 2005 at 3:55 PM . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

    Comment Using Facebook:

     1 

    Well the country is ran by christians and christians are known to be hypocrits ;P

    November 14th, 2005 at 10:13 PM
     2 

    Where WE as a society have failed is in DEMANDING an investigation into those that performed these “equations” from early on that established what it would cost to actually raise a child as well as the cost involved that a married Father is already paying vs. what a married Mother is already paying.

    It seems that everyone always misses the boat and the primary focus that it in the beginning you had the responsibility and input of TWO adults, whereas the post divorce calculations are made with the assumption that there was only the Father that was towing the entire load, therefor the calculations are extremely flawed.

    Try this test: In ALL States; Take your child support calculator, usually found at: http://www.alllaw.com/calculators/Childsupport/ or a variety of areas by just putting “Child Support Calculator” in your web browser….

    Run the following circumstances:

    1) You will assign NOONE as an OBLIGOR but you will give each parent exactly EQUAL values.

    2) The same amount of TIME with the child: That’s 365 / 2 = 182 Days

    3) Each parent makes the SAME income, say $1,800 a month.

    Run the calculator and tell me if it doesn’t come up as an error stating that THIS IS NOT A JOINT PARENTING CALCULATION or an error code to that effect.

    You see, most people never realise that the most perfect programs available can actually run in reverse if not properly tested. The child support calculators that everyone has been using are flawed in this manner.

    I first discovered this when we were running an inventory program at an aircraft repair facility. The program was to calculate the amount of pieces removed from a box, say of 10,000 pieces and when that box was drawn down to say 1,500 pieces left, that program would automatically re-order those pieces.

    Well, the program ran in reverse and every time pieces were removed from the box, the program ADDED to the value that was actually removed. The child support calculators are running in much the same fashion. When EQUAL quantities are added between the parents, the calculator will throw up an error message…..

    Because they want you to rely on this calculator WITHOUT QUESTION after it has already been PROVEN to be flawed is called…. FRAUD against the State and FRAUD against the FEDERAL governments.

    If you DO NOT challenge the programming used and you AGREE to the computations in ANY MANNER, then you have no case because you AGREED to the outcome of the computation, however, if you JUST NOW DISCOVERED THE ERROR, THEN you have a challenge.

    Now, do you have the backbone to challenge the State?

    Also remember, these computations are being done with the ASSUMPTION that the FATHER was the only PROVIDER / OBLIGOR in the family and the END RESULTS of the computation reflect TWO ADULTS as PROVIDERS, ergo, there wouldn’t only be an allowance for ONE OBLIGOR. There would be an allowance for EQUAL OBLIGORS and the State just cannot allow THAT to occur, now can they?

    You see, with JOINT and SHARED PARENTING, The current child support calculators can be wordsmithed into making the vast majority believe that it is ALWAYS correct. When you apply the standards of EQUAL, the programming goes bonkers.

    THIS is why those that demand JOINT or SHARED PARENTING will most always get it, after “fighting hard to acheive that level” in the courts… Because these people have no clue as to WHAT they are asking for and it plays nicely into the hands of the social engineers, child support enforcement and the courts.

    November 15th, 2005 at 2:49 PM

    Leave A Regular Reply:

    NAME: (*)
    EMAIL: (It's Safe, Promise!) (*)
    URL:
    Your Comment Matters

    CommentLuv badge