Declaration of Rights under the First, Second, and Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States

Declaration of Rights under the First, Second, and Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in regards to the Constitutional Protections on the Free Exercise of Religion under the “Strict Scrutiny” Doctrine.

1.    This document is to declare my First Amendment rights and protections under the Constitution of the United States and in how these rights crossover and intertwine with my Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights, as it applies to me specifically, and to the People in general. Thusly, strict scrutiny must be applied.

2.    I was born into a Christian family, to Christian parents, whom themselves had Christian parents, as were their parents before them.

3.    I was raised in and embraced the Christian Faith, I was educated in the faith, and have consciously adopted the Christian faith as a child and also as an adult.

4.    I was dedicated and baptized as a young man, and strive to follow the teachings of Christ both in my personal life and in my professional life.

5.    The Christian religion that I have chosen to embrace requires that the Bible be interpreted in the literal sense, and not in a metaphorical or figurative sense. Thus, when Jesus Christ gives specific instructions to his disciples and followers, we take this as his specific literal commands.

6.    As a Christian, I believe that God created a human, into which he placed his own divinity and person so that God himself took on the biological body of an “only begotten” human, so that he (God) could offer himself as a sacrifice for the atonement of mankind, but to those members of mankind who would willingly accept this atonement, and the entering of a Second Covenant or agreement with God, to replace or amend the original Covenant that God had made with Abraham and his descendants. This is a basic tenant in all major variations of the Christian faith, that God became man, and sacrificed himself to vacate the original sacrifice based convent between God and Abraham, and to convert the sacrifice based “consideration” (to use proper legal contract terminology), into a “by Grace alone” covenant or “by faith alone" depending on the Christian sub-denomination dogma a Christian may choose to embrace.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16, KJV)

7.    As all mainstream variations of the Jewish and Christian faith recognize a point of origin of the faith at the juncture of the Abrahamic covenants as the Genesis of the Abrahamic Religions of both Judaism and all variations of Christianity, as well as part of the Islamic Dogma. This Abrahamic series of Covenants are defined in the Pentateuch and Torah, which is to say the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Number, and Deuteronomy in the Holy Bible. These books are herein incorporated by reference in their entirety, as they are too voluminous to include in this document and are instead included as a document attachment.

8.    Further, in the Book of Jeremiah (versus 31:30-33), the Prophet Jeremiah states that a “new covenant” between God and his followers would take place as final fulfillment of the Old Covenant described in the first five books of the Bible. In turn, that both the Old and New Covenant were established with the House of Israel, through the House of David, and within the Tribe of Judah (2 Samuel 7:8-19 and Luke 1:68-78).

9.    My faith recognized that the New Covenant was established at the Last Supper as Christ performing the first Eucharist with him saying “this cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood" (Luke 22:20).

10. In the tenants of my faith, I/we believe that Jesus Christ had an ancestral lineage back to King David, and through the House of David (though the genetic line of his biological mother Mary and her family, who were of the tribe of Judah, direct descendant of King David), to the Israelite tribe of Judah. Further, that Jesus Christ/God created a “new tribe of Israel” who would follow the teachings of Christ, the Disciples, the Apostles, and the Christian faith and denominations as a whole.

11. In church, and through my family I was taught the Old and New Testament of the Holy Bible and as a child, I was a student of the Gospels to include the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John. I thus recognize and assert the following:

a.    Jesus Christ commanded his followers to be well armed:

"He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one'" (Luke 22:36, KJV).

b.    In the NASB translation and interpretation, the same scripture reads slightly differently, but with a similar meaning as:

“But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.” (Luke 22:36 NASB)

c.    Jesus Christ himself not only personally supported the keeping and bearing of arms, but Christ himself was actually armed:

“I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" (Matthew 10:34, KJV)

d.    Thus, Jesus Christ himself, not merely commanded his followers to be armed, but by his own statement and testimony he, himself was also armed.

e.    Once Apostles had learned the lesson of trusting in God in their early missionary training and assignments “Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes: and salute no man by the way.” (Luke 10:4, KJV), they were to be prepared to defend themselves in the future as they traveled through dangerous areas to take the gospel to the whole world.

f.     In the New Testament, there is an account that when Christ was to be arrested by the religious police (not the Romans) before he was crucified, that the disciples used arms in order to defend him.

"Then Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear. Jesus commanded Peter, 'Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?'" (John 18:10-11, KJV).

g.    Jesus allowed Simon Peter to have the swords both before and after this incident. The problem was not that defending someone is wrong; the problem was that it was inappropriate at this time since Jesus wanted to sacrifice himself and die for our sins (Mark 10:45).

"'Put your sword back in its place,' Jesus said to him, 'for all who draw the sword will die by the sword'" (Matthew 26:52, KJV).

h.    Again, Jesus did not necessarily condemn possessing or using the sword (the keeping and bearing of arms). He told Simon Peter to put it back in its scabbard, but not to get rid of it. What Jesus is saying is that anyone who fought during that specific confrontation risked his life in doing as Christ’s submission (and thus Gods submission) to his sacrifice was already ordained, and process that could not be interfered with.

i.     As biblical scripture demonstrates that Jesus Christ required that his disciples, Apostles, and followers to be armed, then as a Christian I am also compelled by the commands of Christ, by my faith and religious beliefs to also be suitably armed.

j.     Religious civil liberties are clearly guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and in turn by the Fourteenth Amendment, and provide for a federally protected Constitutional right upon which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (or any other state) is prohibited to infringe upon.

k.    Civil liberties which involve the right to keep and bear arms are clearly guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and in turn by the Fourteenth Amendment, and provide for a federally protected right upon which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (or any other state) is prohibited to infringe upon.

l.     In the case of both the First and the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States the Supreme Court has made it well settled that no state may infringe upon the freedom of speech, nor of faith, nor of arms.

m.  Thus, the First Amendment crosses over and articulates with the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and is made Applicable against the States by operation and articulation with the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

n.    Additionally, as these biblical commandments (from Jesus Christ of Nazareth himself) predate the formation of the Constitution of the United States, and were incorporated into the minds and intentions of the signatories of the Constitution of the United States, and into the minds and intentions of the colonial era Congress and the original founders of this nation.

o.    While I am a very gentle, thoughtful, and compassionate Christian, I also recognize that there are times when it is only appropriate to use arms, but that this must be done with great restraint and only as a last resort.

p.   It is notable that the Christian religion and thus the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ are inherently assumed and implicitly present in the Constitution of the United States.

q.    Indeed, according to the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible written by James Strong (based of the King James Version of 1611) swords are mentioned 469 times in the Bible, knives are mentioned 5 times, daggers 3 times, armor 24 times, and arrows 57 times.

r.     In Vines Complete Expository Dictionary by W.E. Vine it is explained that the Ancient Hebrew word for sword is hereb and that this word is present as a weapon of warfare in the Semitic language to include Aramaic, Syriac, Akkadian, Arabic, and other languages of the region and time period of both the Old Testament and New Testament of the Holy Bible. The general description of a sword or hereb is of a two handed, long two-edged implement that is longer than a dagger or knife. Indeed, in the book of Judges in 3:16 a dagger is stated to be up to roughly 24 inches long, or equivalent to a Roman short sword or modern bayonet.

s.    Additionally, in Vines, under the Ancient Greek versions of the New Testament, there is a reference to the sword as either a machaira (short sword or dagger of 18 to 24 inches) or rhomphaia (long sword, in excess of 24 inches).

t.     The United States Constitution contains a direct reference to Jesus Christ.

          i.    "Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth...."

u.    As the framers of the Constitution strongly embraced religious neutrality and religious freedoms and protections in regards to the practicing of both Christian and non-Christian faiths, they nonetheless based the Militia Clause, and the Second Amendment partially upon the direct commandants of Jesus Christ. This is of particular importance as it convincingly demonstrates the intentions of the framers in regards to their own religious beliefs in regards to arms, self-defense, and the defense of others.

v.    Thus, any infringement or restraint upon my right to keep and to bear arms is not only a violation and deprivation of my rights under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, but as such it is an infringement that impairs my ability to follow the commandments of Christ, and the infringement of my right to keep and bear arms also interferes with my First Amendment rights in regards to the practicing and free exercise of my faith of my choosing and forms a deprivation of this right.

w.  To be very direct and concise, I keep and bear arms not only because it is a right acknowledged by the Constitution of the United States (and by those documents which predate the Constitution), but I also keep and bear arms as a requirement of my faith, and for the defense of my country, and for the defense of my home, for my own personal defense, and for other lawful pursuits such as hunting, target shooting, firearms competitions, and training with arms, and training others in regards to arms.

x.    In Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) the Supreme Court required states to meet the "strict scrutiny" standard when refusing to accommodate religiously motivated conduct. This means that a government must have a "compelling interest" regarding such a refusal. The case involved Adele Sherbert, who was denied unemployment benefits by South Carolina because she refused to work on Saturdays, something forbidden by her Seventh-day Adventist faith.

y.   In Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) the Court ruled that a law that "unduly burdens the practice of religion" without a compelling interest, even though it might be "neutral on its face," would be unconstitutional.

z.    The need for a compelling interest was narrowed in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) which held no such interest was required under the Free Exercise Clause regarding a law that does not target a particular religious practice.

aa.  In Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520 (1993) the Supreme Court ruled Hialeah had passed an ordinance banning ritual slaughter, a practice central to the Santería religion while providing exceptions for some practices such as the kosher slaughter. Since the ordinance was not "generally applicable," the Court ruled that it needed to have a compelling interest, which it failed to have, and so was declared unconstitutional.

bb. As the right to keep and to bear arms is a federally protected right, and federal statutes already provides limitations upon those right as to who may not possess arms (for example, citizens adjudged insane or adjudged to be felons are not allowed access to arms), and who is forbidden to possess arms, and how they may be acquired, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts thus has no compelling interest, reason, or cause to impose restrictions beyond those already present in federal statute and enforced by the Federal Government.

cc.  Further, as there is no federal license required to keep and bear arms, and the right to arms is a federally protected act (by virtue of the Constitution of the United States), any state would gravely err in confecting any licensing scheme in regards to arms as any act of licensure is by its very nature an infringement upon a right.

dd. In association with this, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts unlawfully imposes criminal sanctions upon a U.S. Citizen who has lawfully obtained a firearm, and who possesses it inside their home, but who has not been given state permission to do so, which is a direct and very grave infringement upon the Constitutional rights of the otherwise law abiding citizen.

i.    It is also clear that under the Federal law there is no process to apply, obtain, be granted, or to seek any form of licensing of arms by U.S. Citizens. While an export license is needed to export arms, and certain arms require a federal license (FFL) to operate a business to sell primarily firearms on a retail basis, there is no actual license required to merely possess arms.

ii.    There are provisions under federal law for certain arms to involve a transfer tax or transfer stamp, but these do not grant an actual license to own, to keep, or to carry or bear as such a license is Constitutionally forbidden under the 2nd Amendment.

  iii.    Therefore, as the Federal government is specifically enjoined from the infringement upon the “right of the people to keep and bear arms” so to are the individual states.

   iv.    No state is permitted to have any law that in any way interferes with law abiding citizens from keeping and bearing arms for lawful activities, and the moment that any state passes into law any such infringing statute or ruling, it automatically ceases to exist as of the moment of its creation through the Nullification Doctrine of the Supreme Court of the United States.

v.    Further, through the Superiority Clause of the Constitution of the United States, no state, city or county court, and certainly no other court is permitted to rule contrary to the rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States, and when any court is actually suffering from a paucity of common sense, but an abundance of stupidity, the rulings of that state or country court may be utterly ignored by the citizen, with both impunity and immunity.

ee.  As the Supreme Court in Heller states that in the modern day we must look back to the origination of the Constitution and the Second Amendment to see what modern arms were regarded as at the time of the ratification of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Thus the Supreme Court defines that the arms protected under the 2nd Amendment as a personal right included not merely those military weapons in common use at the time of the ratification, but that it must reach forward in time, and protect the modern arms used by a modern army, and this the Second Amendment as incorporated against the state by the 14th Amendment preserves the right to keep and bear a modern M16 or M4 or other weapons system, and no court is allowed to rule contrary to this ruling of the Supreme Court.

ff.   As the Supreme Court requires that when a privilege, immunity, or right is ratified into law or otherwise adopted that in the present day we must reach back in time to the time of the ratification.

 i.    As Jesus Christ commanded that his followers be armed with swords, and in turn, swords were the primary individual weapons of the Roman Legions at the time, and “modern weapons” of the day.

ii.    Thusly, the “swords” which Jesus Christ commanded his followers to purchase and to carry is a right protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in which he commanded his followers to obtain and carry military weapons for personal defense and security.

iii.    As the Supreme Court in Heller requires a “look back” then we must regard the commandment of Christ to include not only swords, but also modern arms to include the M4/M16, the M21, and all arms that can be carried be a single person (the key being that the individual must be able to “bear arms”) as this confines the definition to arms suitable for individual use as opposed to crew served weapons.

iv.    To put it succinctly; the commandments of Christ in regards to the 2nd Amendment are incorporated against the states by way of the 14th Amendment and articulated with the 1st Amendment protections of the Free Exercise of religion.

v.    The Christian faith, through the words of their recognized leader (Jesus Christ), compels those followers to keep and the bear arms… including the keeping and bearing the most modern of arms.

vi.    It also bears mention that under Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 272, Section 36 that the words of God, the Bible, and the words and commandments of Jesus Christ are not to be questioned, reproached, exposed to ridicule, contempt, or disobeyed.

“Section 36. Whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name of God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to good behavior.”

   vii.    As this court must obey the laws of the state, then it must accept the “Word of God” as it is stated, or it commits a criminal act that includes a penalty of fines and imprisonment.

viii.    As the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has passed a criminal statute against Blasphemy, this court must accept unquestionably the Word of God as superior to the Laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The court thus must accept that the “Word of God” as proglamated in the Holy Bible (King James version of 1611, or the Geneva Bibles of 1560 and 1599, plus the Matthews Bible of 1537 and those Bible before it) as law, and of an authority that exceeds the authority of the state, or the ministers of the state. It should be mentioned that when the Puritans arrived in Virginia (1607) and Massachusetts (1620) that they carried with them the Geneva Bible of 1560, and it is this Bible translation upon which this nation was founded.

ix.    As the First Amendment protects the free exercise of the fundamental tenants of my faith and religion of my choosing, and Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 272, Section 36 restricts all courts in the interpretation of the scripture, or to claim that they do not represent what they in fact represent.

x.    In turn, the Supreme Court has incorporated the 1st and 2nd Amendments against the states, and in turn, the Supreme Court has protected the exercise of my faith, which requires the possession and carrying modern arms.

xi.    As I need no permission, license, or permit to be a Christian, or to attend the church of my choosing, to operate a printing press, to write or publish poems, or to obtain, possess and carry arms of my choosing.