Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

17343Re: Little g is JEALOUS of BIG G

Expand Messages
  • Patrick M
    Dec 6, 2009
      MARRIAGE LICENSES are a perfect way to illustrate people's UNQUESTIONING
      obedience to SUPPOSED authority.

      LICENSE, contracts. A right given by some competent authority to do an act,
      which without such authority would be illegal. The instrument or writing
      which secures this right, is also called a license. Vide Ayl. Parerg, 353;
      15 Vin. Ab. 92; Ang. Wat. Co. 61, 85. (Bouvier's Law Dictionary 1856)

      License fee or tar. The price paid to governmental or municipal authority
      for a license to engage in and pursue a particular calling or occupation.
      See home Ins. Co. v. Angusta, 50 Ga. 537; Levi v. Louisville, 97 Ky. 394, 30
      S. W. 073, 28 L B- A. 480. BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, 2ND EDITION, pg. 724

      LICENSE. A personal privilege to do some particular act or series of acts
      on land without possessing any estate or interest thereon, and is ordinarily
      revocable at the will of the licenser... The permission by competent
      authority to do an act which, without such permission, would be illegal, a
      trespass, a tort, or otherwise not allowable. Leave to do thing which
      licenser could prevent. Permission to do a particular thing, to exercise a
      certain privilege or carry on a particular business or to pursue a certain

      A permit granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for a
      consideration, to a person, firm or corporation to pursue some occupation or
      to carry on some business subject to regulation under the police power. A
      license is not a contract between the state and the licensee, but is a mere
      personal permit.

      A permit to use the streets is a mere permit revocable at pleasure. The
      privilege of using the streets and highways by the operation thereon by
      motor carriers for hire can be acquired only by permission or license from
      the state or its political subdivisions. (Emphasis added) BLACK’S LAW

      Given the above DEFINITIONS, WHY would some need to be LICENSED unless the
      SPECIFIC ACTIVITY was one which was “subject to regulation under the police
      power” & DESIGNATED so in law?

      PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE 5352. The use of the public highways for the
      transportation of passengers for compensation is a business affected with a
      public interest. It is the purpose of this chapter to preserve for the
      public full benefit and use of public highways consistent with the needs of
      commerce without unnecessary congestion or wear and tear upon the highways;
      to secure to the people adequate and dependable transportation by carriers
      operating upon the highways; to secure full and unrestricted flow of traffic
      by motor carriers over the highways which will adequately meet reasonable
      public demands by providing for the regulation of all transportation
      agencies with respect to accident indemnity so that adequate and dependable
      service by all necessary transportation agencies shall be maintained and the
      full use of the highways preserved to the public; and to promote carrier and
      public safety through its safety enforcement regulations.

      &file=5351-5363> &group=05001-06000&file=5351-5363

      So why would anyone today need a MARRIAGE LICENSE unless they planned on
      marrying a BLOOD RELATIVE such as a brother, sister or first cousin?

      Of course if someone wants the STATE to be a PARTY to the contract between a
      HUSBAND & WIFE and for the STATE to have a say in the FRUITS (children,
      assets, etc.) of the MARRIAGE, then getting a marriage license would be a
      good thing.

      “This state is a party to every marriage contract of its own residents as
      well as the guardian of their morals.” Roberts v. Roberts, 81 Cal.App.2d
      871 (1947)


      That is if you like having a PARTNER who CONTRIBUTES nothing and can tell
      you what to do.

      "When two people decide to get married, they are required to first procure a
      license from the State. If they have children of this marriage, they are
      required by the State to submit their children to certain things, such as
      school attendance and vaccinations. Furthermore, if at some time in the
      future the couple decides the marriage is not working, they must petition
      the State for a divorce. Marriage is a three-party contract between the man,
      the woman, and the State.” West v. West, 689 N.E.2d 1215 (1998)

      And WHAT IF the STATE says NO? After all IF the STATE can GRANT permission
      to marry, CAN’T it also WITHHOLD it?

      Could this scenario happen one day in America?

      Social services 'to take baby from teenager deemed too stupid to marry'

      A mother-to-be, who was banned from marrying after social workers said she
      is not intelligent enough, is to have her baby taken away immediately after
      giving birth.

      Kerry Robertson, 17, who has mild learning difficulties, has been told that
      she will not be allowed to bring up her own child, who she has already named

      Last month Miss Robertson was prevented from marrying her fiancé Mark
      McDougall, 25, after council officials claimed that she “did not understand
      the implications of getting married”.

      She has now been warned that she will only be allowed a few hours with her
      baby, which is due in January, before it is taken into foster care.

      After hearing the news, Miss Robertson, of Dunfermline, Fife, who is 26
      weeks pregnant, said: “I couldn't believe it. I am so upset – I can't stop

      Mr McDougall, an artist, said he wants to take on full responsibility for
      his son but claims that he is powerless because he is not married to Miss

      He added: “Social Services are ruining our lives. As we are not married –
      because social workers would not let us marry – it seems I have no rights as
      a dad at all.


      Two days before the ceremony, two social workers visited their flat and told
      them that the marriage was illegal because of Miss Robertson’s learning

      The service and reception for 20 guests had to be called off despite the
      couple having already bought rings and a wedding dress.

      At the time, Miss Robertson said: “I know what marriage is. It is when two
      folks want to spend the rest of their lives together. I love Mark and I want
      to get married to him.”

      Mr McDougall added: “Despite arguing that we loved one another and didn't
      want our baby to be born to unwed parents, they would not budge. It's a

      He claims that social services have exaggerated the extent of Miss
      Robertson’s learning difficulties and that she is hoping to go back to
      college to catch up academically.


      In May it was disclosed that Rachel Pullen, 24, had her three-year-old
      daughter taken away from her by social services when she was six months old
      after Nottingham City Council officials deemed her too stupid to look after
      the child.


      Patrick in California

      "It ain't what ya don't know that hurts ya. What really puts a hurtin' on ya
      is what ya knows for sure, that just ain't so." -- Uncle Remus

      --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, Fred Marshall <fredm07@...> wrote:

      >When couples obtain

      > a marriage license (license being permission to do that which is

      > otherwise illegal), they unknowingly enter into a contract with the

      > state, essentially marrying the state, in a sense. Because the state

      > becomes a party to the marriage (legal polygamy, sort of), it also has

      > legal interest in whatever is produced by the marriage, i.e. children.

    • Show all 13 messages in this topic