[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Government adds 50K jobs monthly for two years. Half were Biden's attempt to mask a market collapse with debt.

You’ve Never Seen THIS Side Of Donald Trump

President Donald Trump Nominates Former Florida Rep. Dr. Dave Weldon as CDC Director

Joe Rogan Tells Josh Brolin His Recent Bell’s Palsy Diagnosis Could Be Linked to mRNA Vaccine

President-elect Donald Trump Nominates Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture

Trump Taps COVID-Contrarian, Staunch Public Health Critic Makary For FDA

F-35's Cooling Crisis: Design Flaws Fuel $2 Trillion Dilemma For Pentagon

Joe Rogan on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine Aid

Joe Rogan on 62 year-old soldier with one arm, one eye

Jordan Peterson On China's Social Credit Controls

Senator Kennedy Exposes Bad Jusge

Jewish Land Grab

Trump Taps Dr. Marty Makary, Fierce Opponent of COVID Vaccine Mandates, as New FDA Commissioner

Recovering J6 Prisoner James Grant, Tells-All About Bidens J6 Torture Chamber, Needs Immediate Help After Release

AOC: Keeping Men Out Of Womens Bathrooms Is Endangering Women

What Donald Trump Has Said About JFK's Assassination

Horse steals content from Sara Fischer and Sophia Cai and pretends he is the author

Horse steals content from Jonas E. Alexis and claims it as his own.

Trump expected to shake up White House briefing room

Ukrainians have stolen up to half of US aid ex-Polish deputy minister

Gaza doctor raped, tortured to death in Israeli custody, new report reveals

German Lutheran Church Bans AfD Members From Committees, Calls Party 'Anti-Human'

Berlin Teachers Sound Alarm Over Educational Crisis Caused By Multiculturalism

Trump Hosts Secret Global Peace Summit at Mar-a-Lago!

Heat Is Radiating From A Huge Mass Under The Moon

Elon Musk Delivers a Telling Response When Donald Trump Jr. Suggests

FBI recovers funds for victims of scammed banker

Mark Felton: Can Russia Attack Britain?

Notre Dame Apologizes After Telling Hockey Fans Not To Wear Green, Shamrocks, 'Fighting Irish'

Dear Horse, which one of your posts has the Deep State so spun up that's causing 4um to run slow?


Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: SSN-666 Case Looming In Texas
Source: American Christian Liberty Society
URL Source: http://www.christianliberty.org/art ... 666-case-looming-in-texas.html
Published: May 10, 2007
Author: H. Lance Freeman
Post Date: 2007-05-10 20:08:08 by David Alan Carmichael
Keywords: constitution, religion, ssn
Views: 832
Comments: 61

SSN-666 Case Looming In Texas H. Lance Freeman May 9, 2007

After several years of wrangling with the Texas government, a crop duster is giving the Texas Department of Agriculture one last chance to approve his application for a pesticide applicators license without compelling him to forsake his religious obligations. Gene McArthur has submitted a religious accommodation request to Todd Staples, the Commissioner of the Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA). In his request, Mr. McArthur states, “I am prohibited by my religion from identifying with the number of the beast cited by the book of Revelation in the Holy Bible… The Social Security Number is the number of the beast.” Mr. McArthur’s religious prohibition conflicts with the TDA requirement for all applicants to identify themselves with a Social Security Number. The requirement stems from section 666 of the United States Code dealing with Social Security (42 USC §666).

The first round of Mr. McArthur’s battle was fought by him alone. As a result, Susan Combs, then Commissioner of the TDA, denied Mr. McArthur’s religious accommodation request acting upon the opinion of Attorney General Gregg Abbot (Opinion #GA-0289). In his opinion, the Attorney General stated, ““Although the "right to worship without governmental restriction or compulsion is fundamental, the Supreme Court has refused to strictly scrutinize laws that are generally applicable and neutral toward religion yet have an incidental effect on certain religious practices.”” Mauldin, 94 S.W.3d at 872 (citing Smith, 494 U.S. at 878-79). In 1999, over five years before the Attorney General reviewed Mr. McArthur’s case, the Texas legislature passed the Religious Freedom Act intending to reverse the effects of court refusals to “strictly scrutinize laws that are generally applicable and neutral toward religion yet have an incidental effect on certain religious practices.” In his opinion regarding Mr. McArthur’s situation, Mr. Abbott never mentioned the existing Texas statute that specifically addressed the government’s burden to consider accommodation a religious practice that conflicts with a government practice (Tx. Stat., Title 5, Ch. 110). The Statute provides that, “a government agency may not substantially burden a person's free exercise of religion” – unless – “the government agency demonstrates that the application of the burden to the person: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that interest.”

This round, Mr. McArthur is not standing alone. He has the support of an Austin law firm, and a religious liberty advocacy group. In a letter from the lawyer representing Mr. McArthur to Todd Staples, Commissioner of the TDA, she stated “It is clear to me that both the Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, (42 USC §2000bb) and the Texas Religious Freedom Act (Texas Statutes, Title 5, Chapter 110) were violated when Mr. McArthur’s previous religious accommodation request was denied.” In her letter, Mr. McArthur’s lawyer asserted that the government could not prove a “compelling” governmental interest to the “person” of Mr. McArthur who does not have any child support obligations. She stated, ““Government efficiency such as enforcing child support obligations with relative quickness or accuracy is not the principal purpose for which governments are instituted. Securing Mr. McArthur’s religious liberty is a “compelling governmental interest” that substantially outweighs relative administrative conveniences or contrivances.”” She warned the government that “Unless Mr. McArthur’s request for religious accommodation is approved, within the customary timeframe required for processing pesticide applicators licenses, we anticipate filing a sixty day notice of intent to take action at law in compliance with the provisions of Texas Religious Freedom Act, Title 5, Sections 110.00l through 110.012.”

Mr. McArthur is affiliated with a network of other Christian’s who share the same religious beliefs. They are joining together to provide faith and financial support for Mr. McArthur in his fight. David Alan Carmichael is the Principal Minister of the American Christian Liberty Society. Mr. Carmichael recently prevailed in a law suit against the United States Navy who discharged him after he made a religious accommodation request to not be identified by a Social Security Number, David Alan Carmichael v. United States, 298 F.3d 1367, Fed. Cir. (Aug 2002); 66 Fed. Cl. 115 (2005). He founded the American Christian Liberty Society as a religious support group focused upon the needs of those who’s religious convictions prohibit them from identifying with a universal identification number, or through the use of biometric identifiers such as fingerprints, retina scans, facial scans, DNA, or implanted electronic devices (http://www.christianliberty.org). Their group believes that those mechanisms fulfill the Bible prophesies of Revelation, chapter 13, referring to the number, mark, and name of the Beast. Mr. Carmichael wrote a letter to Todd Staples, Commissioner of the TDA to affirm the bona fides of Mr. McArthur’s convictions, saying, “I interviewed him with the intent of determining whether or not he is truly sincere, whether his beliefs are Biblically based, and whether his lifestyle and actions are consistent with his professed convictions… I am certain that to Mr. McArthur, identifying with the Social Security Number is in affect denying loyalty to Jesus Christ for the sake of loyalty to the Anti-Christ.”

Mr. Carmichael believes that Mr. McArthur’s fight will have far-reaching consequences upon the future of religious liberty in America.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 46.

#3. To: christine (#0)

Keeping you up to date

David Alan Carmichael  posted on  2007-05-10   21:52:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: David Alan Carmichael (#3)

Mr. Carmichael recently prevailed in a law suit against the United States Navy who discharged him after he made a religious accommodation request to not be identified by a Social Security Number, David Alan Carmichael v. United States, 298 F.3d 1367, Fed. Cir. (Aug 2002); 66 Fed. Cl. 115 (2005).

Wait a minute here. You had no problem serving in the armed forces of the United States, but you had a problem with an assigned number? Sorry, not buying it.

RickyJ  posted on  2007-05-10   22:11:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: RickyJ (#4)

You had no problem serving in the armed forces of the United States, but you had a problem with an assigned number? Sorry, not buying it.

I came to the conviction about the number while I was in the military. God spoke to me and ordered me to forsake the number. He did not tell me to get out of the Navy, He told me to forsake the number and then go to the Navy leadership and ask for an accommodation. I did what I was told.

What is it that you do not "buy"?

David Alan Carmichael  posted on  2007-05-10   22:16:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: David Alan Carmichael (#5)

"What is it that you do not "buy"?"

That the Goddess told you anything so explicit and exact for one. (I am Wiccan, and believe in the Goddess who created this world and all on it.)

We have a president who claims he gets directions from 'God' all the time and would have us believe his agenda is divinely inspired.

Good luck with your quest, as I'm not especially fond of the S.S. number, but core religious differences we have preclude me from buying this claim of divine contact of yours'.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2007-05-10   22:22:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Ferret Mike (#7)

That the Goddess told you anything so explicit and exact for one.

That is because "the goddess" neither hears, sees, nor speaks.

The social security number is the "number of the beast" referred to in the book of Revelation, chapter 13. The manifestation of it now is merely another thing that demonstrates that the word of Elohim is true. You can read about Elohim in Genesis chapter 1. Elohim speaks, and He sees and He hears.

David Alan Carmichael  posted on  2007-05-10   22:31:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: David Alan Carmichael (#9)

The Bible is an interesting and deliberately censored original historical document, nothing more.

I had Wiccan on my dogtags when I was an NCO in the U.S. Army and I got my share of hassle from various Christains not liking this. So I empathize with your situation.

But I do not believe the Goddess operates on a one to one basis with explicit instructions with anyone. That just does not happen.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2007-05-10   22:40:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Ferret Mike (#10)

But I do not believe the Goddess operates on a one to one basis with explicit instructions with anyone. That just does not happen

I am sure Moses' belief system had a radical change once he had a first-hand experience. When Elohim said, "Moses", I am sure Moses understood that Elohim (has He referred to Himself beginning in Genesis) both sees, hears, and speaks. Jesus said, my sheep know my voice. He said, if you abide in my words, you are my disciples indeed, and you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.

I have had the same first hand experience that Moses had. It hinges not on what people may or may not believe. The Disciple of Jesus, John, wrote the book of Revelation on the basis of a first-hand encounter with Elohim. I have thus far acted upon my first-hand directive from Almighty God. He has shown Himself miraculously strong on my behalf since I have been obedient to Him and have forsaken the number of the beast. Our victory in Court was after a series of tangible miracles. My survival since being ejected from the Navy was due to a series of tangible miracles. I wrote a book about it.

The scriptures say, "The eyes of the Lord look to and fro throughout the whole earth, searching to show Himself strong on behalf of those whose hearts are loyal to Him." I have experienced this, and Him, first-hand. It has been quite exciting, though the first steps of obedience were very scary.

David Alan Carmichael  posted on  2007-05-10   22:56:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: David Alan Carmichael (#16)

How many of you so-called men out there rule over your wives, as God said you should? This does not mean that you should be anything other than loving to your wives, but who really controls your household? Who decides what the children will be taught? Who arranges for their spiritual education? Who drives household policy, discipline, etc.? Who is in charge in your bedroom? Who leads your family to God? Who do you know that stands up against injustice, or is fighting to return us to God’s Laws (rather than man’s illegal laws)?

If you did not answer ‘I do’ to ALL of the questions above, you are not a real man in God’s eyes.

http://100777.com/feminism/

Do you believe women are chattle and not equal partners with men?

Ferret Mike  posted on  2007-05-10   22:59:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Ferret Mike (#18)

Do you believe women are chattle and not equal partners with men?

I can only believe was Elohim has said. My wife is my help-meet. She is bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh. Since I have left my father and mother, the two of us have become one flesh. None-the-less, I do not permit her to make contracts. I make a point of signing everything. She likes it. If I sign all the contracts, nobody can take her to court. I sent in my last tax return as head of household. My wife does not file tax returns. My wife will not be taken to court. The buck stops here. I protect her. I fulfill the role that I do best, and she fulfills the roles she does best. We love Elohim first, and then our love for each other remains the best it can be.

David Alan Carmichael  posted on  2007-05-10   23:14:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: David Alan Carmichael (#25)

I protect her. I fulfill the role that I do best, and she fulfills the roles she does best. We love Elohim first, and then our love for each other remains the best it can be.

That sounds fair, I believe men and women are equal but have different roles.

Diana  posted on  2007-05-11   1:01:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Diana (#45)

That sounds fair, I believe men and women are equal but have different roles

I only believe what I read. "And the two shall become one flesh". Man and wife are one, not mere equals.

David Alan Carmichael  posted on  2007-05-11   1:04:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 46.

#47. To: David Alan Carmichael (#46)

"Man and wife are one, not mere equals."

Nice sounding verbiage, but the bottom line is your brain is the only one whose free will and decision making process is honored in this sort of relationship.

That is just too patriarchial for my taste. Men and women are equals and should be respected as equals.

Ferret Mike  posted on  2007-05-11 01:12:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 46.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]