IF YOU HAVE TO FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHTS, THEY MOST LIKELY WERE NOT PROTECTED

Anyone who finds themselves in a position of fighting for their rights should ask themselves if they defended these rights when they were initially challenged. MOST LIKELY THEY DID NOT!………

Usually, your rights are challenged and abused before they are lost and you fight to get them back. With rights, come responsibilities! If they are being infringed or violated, OR, challenged, you need to protect them before they have been taken away.

IF YOU HAVE HAD THEM TAKEN AWAY—–GOOD LUCK GETTING THEM BACK!!!!!

Any dispute or issue challenging any of your presumed substantiated rights should be automatically a STOP!!!! AT THE VIOLATION OR CHALLENGE OF THE ASSUMED RIGHT BEFORE IT HAS BEEN TAKEN AWAY!!!!!

THIS MIGHT REMAIN IN DISAGREEMENT WITH NO RESOLUTION, BUT, IN NO WAY SHALL THAT BE CONSTRUED AS A FORFEITURE OF THE RIGHT IN QUESTION!!!!!!

MAKE SURE IF YOU BELIEVE IN SOMETHING YOU ARE WILLING TO DEFEND IT

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Benjamin Franklin

Advertisements

Opinions and Debate

“Whenever there is a debate, those who can make a statement of undebatable informational facts rather than unsupported opinions, should not have speak any further. The privilege of silence after a quality statement is a luxury that the opposing doesn’t have. Opposition has the burden of disproving that statement with a logical and reasonable claim supported with factual information rather than interpretational.”

Stephen James

LAWS ARE PRECISE IN BEING INCONCLUSIVE LOL (RANT)

It’s about time I rant about this topic. Well, first off, how could I not pick on this topic when it is way to easy.  I’ll have to try and focus on one specific area at a time (something that laws have difficulty doing)!

What a field day I can have on this topic. **I’M NOT A LAW STUDENT, LAWYER, OR HAVE ANY OTHER TYPE OF LEGAL BACKROUND** SO DON’T PANIC! I WIL NOT BE USING THIER LEGAL LANGUAGE! WE, STILL HAVE DIFFICULTIES WITH THE WORDS WE USE ON THE DAY THE DAY LOL                                                                                                                          LAUGH NOW BEFORE THIS GOES IN LEGAL LITERACY 101- CHAPTER 1 IS TITLED “THEY DON’T WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND ANYTHING” (THEY EVEN INCLUDE PIG LATIN- I MEAN LATIN) JUST TO THROW YOU OFF LOL WHAT’S THE DEAL WITH THAT?

DOES THE LATIN LANUAGE REMAIN DUE TO LAZINESS, OR FROM BEING PREOCCUPIED  (REVISING, CREATING,  AMENDING ALL THE OTHER LAWS)? OR, IS IT THERE JUST TO PISS PEOPLE OFF? MAYBE, ITS PART OF AN OVERALL DESIGN WHICH MAKES PEOPLE FEEL THE NEED TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY, AND ENTER INTO PROCEEDINGS, TRIALS, MOTIONS, APPEALS, PLEADINGS, JUSTICE, AND BE AWARDED COMPENSATION FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN WHICH YOU NEED TO SHARE WITH YOUR ATTORNEY, LOL

EVEN IF LATIN WAS NOT INVOLVED THEY USE A LANGUAGE THAT CONSISTS OF WORDS WE GENERALLY WOULD NEVER USE. EVER! 

THEY HAD A GOOD RUN UNTIL THE INTERNET POPPED UP. IT IS NOW POSSIBLE FOR THE CLIENT TO RESEARCH INFORMATION WITHOUT REQUIRING THAT MUCH EFFORT.

THERE WAS WIDESPREAD LEGAL PANIC LASTING AT LEAST 2 OR 3 MINUTES UNTIL THEIR EDUCATED MIND SAID “THESE ARE PEOPLE, YOU COULD POST THE INFORMATION ON THEIR FRONT LAWN AND THEY WOULDN’T GIVE IT ANY ATTENTION, SO STOP PANICKING” !    LOL

We might as well start with general understandings and interpretation of law. Already, without going forward I can start ranting on my opening statement.  Interpretation and understanding of laws is so comedic and irrational that they have a “built in safety clause” This is to apply when I Law is considered to be vague, and not clearly understandable by any “reasonable person” lol

I can’t help but laugh as I’m writing this. How could you reasonably identify a reasonable person, from someone who is not reasonable? Especially when a reasonable (sensible) person would possibly have a more difficult time understanding the laws because already presented with conflict that an unreasonable person is one who would break the law by action made through a mind without reasoning capabilities. That would mean that an unreasonable person could not violated a law but not have understood the law, which would make them free from guilt..

A person who is reasonable that will challenge a law or possibly break a law with a logical and valid REASON will be guilty because they knowingly defied the law of record.

There is a lot more to this, you didn’t expect it to be simple, did you? Just writing what I just wrote I’m suffering a mental meltdown. I’ll stop here for now. Think the new defense will be not the glove doesn’t fit, it will be I don’t get it. Oh one last thing consider. There are a few laws that referred to the public morals. Naturally people have different morals, which would cause question to what would violate A person morals considering everybody has different ones. Just you know the law says that the public morals is decided by the government of what they consider to be moral and apply that to the public. Ha ha we won’t even get into that, but if you didn’t know what was considered to be the public morals, then you could legally violated because you didn’t know lol

I’m going to make this post without reviewing it. My brain hurts enough just from writing it. I’ll review it some other time

GETTING CONTROL HAS BEEN SOLVED! (QUOTE)LOL

“AT LAST I HAVE FIGURED OUT HOW TO BE IN CONTROL. IT WAS JUST A MISUNDERSTANDING THAT MADE IT SO DIFFICULT. IF YOU WANT TO BE IN CONTROL, REALIZE YOU HAVE IT UNTIL YOU LOOK FOR IT. IMPORTANT THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT IT WILL REMAIN LOST AS LONG AS YOU SEEK IT.”

STEPHEN JAMES

“THE WIZARD OF OZ” MY CRAZY INTERPRETATION- OR NOT-

POSSIBLE PSYCHOLOGICAL PERCEPTION TO THE STORY OF “THE WIZARD OF OZ”

This one of those things that came to me out of nowhere, completely unexpected, and have no idea what caused it to pop up! Whatever the reason, I began seeing a very legitimate and rational psychological application that my interpretation of the story seems to fit.

IT’S BEEN MANY YEARS SINCE I’VE WATCHED IT….. EVEN STILL, I’M PRETTY SURE THIS IS HOW THE STORY GOES SOMETHING LIKE THIS-****READ MY UPDATE I PUT IN THE COMMENTS**** I WANT TO KEEP MY ORIGINAL POST UNEDITED… ANYTHING I’M GOING TO ADD AFTER WILL BE IN COMMENTS SO I CAN KEEP MY ORIGINAL UNEDITED VERSION 

AFTER SHE LOOSES CONSCIOUSNESS! AFTER THE TORNADO

Dorothy, is following the yellow brick road leading to the Wizard of Oz in Emerald City…. Along the way she comes across a Lion, Scarecrow, and the Tin Man…

These characters (INSIDE HER MIND) all were missing something! Courage, a Brain, and a heart…… da da da da dah…..

-I’m not even going to get into the wicked witch (neighbor toto bit before this unconsciousness), or the relevance of any other characters (right now) ! lol

BUT!

PUT TOGETHER ALL THE “TRAITS” OR “NEEDS” OF HER “UNCONSCIOUS””FRIENDS” AS SHE FOLLOWED THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD…. JUST THINK ABOUT THESE TRAITS/QUALITIES BEING APPLIED TO AN INDIVIDUAL—- IT’S LIKE THIS STORY WAS A DEPICTION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL COGNITIVE BEHAVIORAL THERAPY, OR AWARENESS. LOL  ——

(THE ROAD LED TO THE WIZARD, AND IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE WIZARD WAS ACTUALLY NOT EVEN A WIZARD AT ALL! -THANKS TOTO!- HE DIDN’T GIVE THEM ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR RECOGNITION THAT THEY ALREADY ATTAINED WHATEVER IT WAS ON THIER OWN DURING THIS JOURNEY….) NO? YES?

BUT!

RIGHT AFTER THAT, SHE JUST WANTS TO CLICK HER HEELS TO “GO HOME” TOO MUCH FOR HER TO HANDLE I GUESS….

MAYBE, SHE COULDN’T HANDLE BEING IN A LOGICAL AND MENTAL STATE OF COMPLETENESS – BECAUSE SHE REALLY JUST WANTED TO GO HOME! WHERE EVERYTHING WAS “NORMAL” AGAIN LOL

FOLLOWED THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD ALL THE WAY TO THE ANSWERS, AND THE GREAT OZ!-

THAN RIGHT BACK TO -“THERE IS NO PLACE LIKE HOME”

— THIS SEEMS TO STILL BE A COMMON BEHAVIOR FOR PEOPLE….. PUTTING IN SO MUCH EFFORT TO FIND AN ANSWER TO SOMETHING THEY MOST LIKLEY WON’T BE ABLE TO ACCEPT, THAN TURN/RUN AWAY FROM IT SO THEY CAN  RETURN TO “NORMALITY” … BUT AT LEAST THEY KNOW THE ANSWER LOL

The Wizard of Oz (1939)

Directed by Victor Fleming
Produced by Mervyn LeRoy
Screenplay by
Noel Langley
Florence Ryerson
Edgar Allan Woolf
Based on The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
by L. Frank Baum

OPINIONS OF ORIGINALITY OR BY INFLUENCE

“IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THE UNDERSTANDING AND APPLICATION OF AN OPINION HAS REMAINED GENERIC. AN OPINION SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED AS EITHER ONE CREATED THROUGH INDIVIDUAL THOUGHT, OR ONE THAT IS STILL INFLUENCED BY UNDERLYING BELIEFS”

STEPHEN JAMES

Specific (quote)

“It’s interesting that whenever a commonly accepted idea or belief is challenged by a question that requires a specific answer, it never receives one!”

STEPHEN JAMES

“Rules were meant to be broken”

No No No….. Rules were meant to followed and obeyed otherwise you will be punished in some way. You can’t just go out and start breaking the rules as fun as that might seem. Your missing the real fun of my approach…. “Rules and laws were meant to control people willing to accept them, as apposed to those who question and challenge them”