Freedom of Speech (to lie) — Freedom of Religion (to perpetuate a lie) — Freedom of the Press (to publish a lie)

March 5, 2018 |

| 9 min read

… Freedom of Assembly (to defend a lie).

The Right to Bear Arms (to kill for a lie).

As Americans, we are granted the right and protection by our Constitution … to lie.

Consider, for example, a journalist who claims to have a “source” that the journalist will not divulge. Without revealing the source so that the source can be cross-examined and deposed, how can what the journalist writes as a result of the information gained from the source be trusted? What if the journalist’s source is lying?  What if there really is no source at all and the journalist made one up in order to give more validity to the journalist’s own personal opinion?  (This happens more than we would like to acknowledge.)

Consider religion.

Someone must be lying when one religious leader claims that God speaks only to him or her and to no one else. If God is the source of religion, then there must be a multitude of disagreeing gods perpetuating their own religion.  Like journalists, religious leaders maintain that their source of truth cannot be divulged or revealed to be cross-examined and deposed.  Instead of calling the person from whom religious leaders receive their information a “source,” religious leaders call their source, “God.”  Who can depose God?

Religious leaders, similar to journalists, maintain and protect the anonymity of the source of their information. Only religious leaders and journalists know the real “source” of their information.

How many lives have been ruined by journalists and religious leaders who use their freedoms to defame and persecute one who does not believe in their information?

How many lies have been invented and spread because people have the freedom to say and publish whatever they want, about anyone they want?

How many innocent lives have been destroyed by the freedom of the press to report one’s arrest and criminal charge before the person has been granted their due process of law?

Through the due process of law, an unnamed or unavailable-to-cross-exam “source” cannot be a witness at trial. Any information gained from an unnamed “source” is not admissible during the proper due process of law.

Before the accused is legally deemed convicted, their reputation and personal life has already been destroyed by the Freedom of the Press, regardless of whether or not journalists use the word “alleged.”

Consider the Salem witch trials of the late 17th Century. We know that there are no such things as witches … well, the prudent of us know this, but a journalist at that time had their source, and the religious leaders at that time had theirs. Innocent women were murdered because of a lie, both in what was reported and what the religious leaders believed their god wanted done to witches. This god killed innocent women. The journalists working for God, who wrote the Bible, justified these cruel murders.

Consider the motto and coat of arms of the most prestigious college in the United States: Harvard University.


“Veritas” is Latin for “truth.” The university was founded and established by religious leaders who used the Bible as the source of their truth. Harvard was not established and founded on veritas. It was established on the Bible.

Harvard is America’s oldest university. It is the home of the first printing press. It is where journalists were first trained and given the value and prestige that they needed in order to have their information considered as more veritas than another’s.

The information found in every one of Harvard’s multi-million number of books is a personal opinion of the book’s author … of a journalist. NONE of this information can be used in a court of law as evidence in any matter of law. Everything that any Harvard student learns can be disputed and argued.

There are all kinds of Latin phrases engraved on the buildings throughout Harvard’s campus, but the founders missed one … an important one. In the middle of the campus, in front of its most prestigious library, in the middle of Harvard Yard, there should be a large memorial of granite erected to the mythical Christian Apostle Paul holding a Bible.

If Harvard’s motto, Veritas, was upheld and truthful, the memorial’s Bible’s inscription would read in large, unmistakeable words:

Semper Discentes et Numquam ad Scientiam Veritatis Pervenientes

We will let the tens of thousands of Harvard’s graduates translate this meaning.

The Humanity Party® proclaims that the United States Constitution, although at the time it was written it might have been the best government constitution the world had ever known, (and this isn’t saying much at that time), is a corrupt document of inhumane laws that needs to be completely rewritten to conform to a modern world and a more humane and equitable system of law and order.

To reign in the abuses of Freedom of Speech, of Religion, of the Press, and of Assembly, (the right to lie), and the system of law controlled by lawyers and judges that one cannot afford, we propose the following modification:

Article IV – Inalienable Human Rights

Section 6 – Right to Personal Information Privacy

  1. Right to Privacy.  Each person shall have the right to privacy of their personal information, except information that is deemed necessary in the enforcement of the laws provided by this Constitution or for the protection of the people of the Republic.
  2. Publication of Individual Personal Information.  Each person’s individual information, of any event concerning that person in the past, of any event about that person occurring in the present, or of any event in which the person shall participate in the future, shall be protected from publication in any media source, including the Internet, unless that person, of that person’s free will and choice, or by Court order in protection of the public interest, grants permission to the access and publication of such information.
  3. Database of Personal Information for Law Enforcement.  The Federal Law Enforcement Agency, in conjunction with the Courts, shall be restricted and limited in the publication of a person’s personal information to a database specifically designed for the protection of the people of this Republic and this Constitution.

Section 7 – Right of Belief, Expression, and the Media

  1. Right of Belief.  Congress shall establish laws that protect each person’s right to act, to be acted upon, to believe, and to express opinion, where that action, belief or expression of opinion does not affect, extend upon, to, or impede another person’s right to act, to be acted upon, to believe, or to express opinion.
  2. Right of the Press (Media).  Congress shall make no law infringing upon the right of the Press (Media) to publish beliefs, opinions, expressions, or any other matter suitable to the purposes for which Media exists, except those that protect personal information according to Section 6 of this Article.

Section 8 – Right to Property

  1. Personal Belongings.  Except for those belongings specifically prohibited by this Constitution, Congress shall enact and support laws that protect a person’s right to hold personal property of any kind, and enjoy the benefits thereof, where that personal property does not obstruct, abuse, abate, or in any other way impede the right of another to hold personal property and enjoy the benefits thereof.
  2. Search and Seizure.  Congress shall make no law that permits the search and seizure of personal property, unless by such prohibition, the life, liberty, or personal property of another is threatened in any way, at any time.

Section 9 – Due Process of Law

  1. Right to Self-Representation.  Congress shall establish laws that guarantee each person equal due process of law, including the right to self-representation (pro se). A person shall have the right to self-representation in any Court of law where that representation is determined to be just, reasonable, or an application for redress or relief that is reasonably established by the Petitioner for any violation of Constitutional law.
  2. Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure.  Congress shall establish Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure that favor and support the right to self-representation.
  3. Counsel for Pro Se Litigants.  Each Court shall provide a legal staff of bailiffs, clerks, and officers (attorneys) to support self-representation. Each court shall establish and promote efficient Rules of Procedure and due process. The Court shall provide a civil pro se litigant up to 2 hours of counsel prior to the hearing of the petition and during the time allotted by the Court for the hearing. The Court shall provide criminal pro se litigants unlimited, reasonable counsel.
  4. Payment of Court Costs in Civil Matters.  In any Civil matter, if the Court rules in favor of the Respondent, the Petitioner shall pay the Court’s costs and fees, including those fees of the Court-appointed attorneys assisting the Respondent, or the Respondent’s own attorney, and any punitive damages granted to the Respondent. If the Court rules in favor of the Plaintiff, that person or entity shall pay its own costs and fees, but not those of the Respondent or of the Court.
  5. Payment of Court Costs in Criminal Matters.  The Court shall pay all costs incurred by its proceedings in any Criminal matter.
  6. Determination of Civil Matters.  All Civil matters shall be determined by trial by the Court in which the matter is heard. There shall be no jury trials in any Civil Matter.
  7. Determination of Criminal Matters.  All Criminal matters shall be determined by a trial by Jury, where the Defendant, in all cases, shall be guaranteed the reasonable right and ability to participate in selecting the Jury.
  8. Rights of the Innocent Until Proven Guilty—Bail Guidelines.  When charged with any criminal offense, and until that person has been provided the benefits of due process of law and found guilty of the alleged crime, that person shall be presumed and treated as if that person is not guilty; which includes, but is not limited to, liberty from incarceration and the necessity of posting bail. Unless indisputable evidence has been obtained, verified, and accepted by the Court against a person charged with a crime of violence against another person or another person’s property, no person shall be held by bond, unless or until that person fails to appear at the Court-appointed times scheduled for that person’s appearance ordered by the Court or law enforcement officials.

Share this post

One World Government
Gun control
All Featured
all posts

Take action.

Learn how