Neal Boortz Quote

“Law” has a broad nomenclature that divides into multiple political philosophies, rendering many temporal images, understandings, mental aberrations, systems and differing exercises. An authoritative source helps define subsequent philosophical applications as well as the applied system of law and justice. – By example: 1) “the laws of nature and of nature’s God” (Declaration of Independence {natural law nomenclature animates an umbrella of that which is eternal and absolute in nature} natural law - ) Infinite and unwavering rules of nature are categorically understood through assessable proficiencies such as gravity, physics, math, life, liberty and property (the constitutional law of the land). 2) Legal Positivism; Legal Positivism is arbitrary, “An arbitrary law is one made by the legislator simply because he wills it, and is not founded in the nature of things;” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary) – Legal Positivism is most often “used in opposition to natural law” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary). 3) Legal Realism; Legal Realism is arbitrary and habitually time/situation fleeting, instituted by any source, at any time regardless of natural law or legal positivism (executive, judicial, personal, etc.). 4) etc.

The de jure States united, by its / their founding declarations and definitions was to use tools such as codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, statutes, etc. to define the law that already existed in nature. One of the antithetical philosophies to individual sovereignty, inalienable rights, liberty, the nobility of the specie and natural law (and a common law based thereon) is recognized as “democracy”. Compromising natural law with a democracy (the will of the majority’s legislators, executives and judges) illustrates such end results as slavery and “woke progressivism”.