lawful v legal ep 3 - The Uncomfortable Truth скачать в хорошем качестве

lawful v legal ep 3 - The Uncomfortable Truth

Teresa (legal)might argue that statutes are the law of the land, binding on all within jurisdiction, necessary for ordered society, contracts (explicit or implied), public order, taxation, licensing, etc. Courts uphold them as supreme positive law; opting out isn't viable without consequences. The system isn't perfect but provides structure, enforcement, and collective benefits. Chris Michael (law) could counter that true law stems from higher principles, do no harm, no victim/no crime, natural rights predating governments, common law maxims (e.g., "the law of the land"), or divine/natural equity. Modern "legal" constructs often create artificial persons/entities, extractive obligations. A "return to law" means reclaiming sovereignty, rejecting statutory fictions, and living under principles where consent and harm matter most. I'm geared up for an honest exchange. If either side brings receipts (case law, historical maxims, or modern examples), YouTube live 8pm Tuesday. Uncomfortabletruthie What's your prediction: Will it stay civil and illuminating, or devolve into the usual talking-past-each-other? Either way, these discussions push boundaries and force people to think deeper about authority and freedom. See you there!   / teresa.clyne.ba.msc