"free" will of choice represents the response to the "dom"inance of balance (free-dom) aka choice (sub) to balance (dom).
Perceived balance (offer) to choice (response) represents natural law; while choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) represents contract law in ignorance of natural law; also referred to as religion (from religio - to bind anew).
The only ones laughing their asses off are the ones you consent to submit your free will to. Question that.
i exercise my liberty assertively without reservation and only submit to God lmao thank you for continually educating people as whether they like it or not words are important lmao
Before the suggestible word comes the perceived sound. Those who consent to suggested (fiction) ignore perceived (reality). This is how the parasitic few control suggested narratives for the ignorant many consenting to them.
Instead of evaluating the suggested words as "important"; how about questioning "imported from where"? Could it be perceived sound?
my liberty
Libertas; from liber - "free". As in "free" will of choice in response to "dom"inance of balance aka free-dom. Free implies within dominance; hence in response to it. It ain't "my liberty" but being "at liberty as choice to balance".
only submit to God
In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti. The "in nomine" (aka in the name of) represents your consent to their suggestion of "God"; hence being religion - "to bind anew" under choice (suggestion of religion) to choice (consent by faith) contract law.
Meanwhile under perceived natural law...if I go out and stand still, at what point do I need to consent to have faith in anything suggested? Will it happen after I'm forced by the natural order to respond to breathing; thirst; hunger and lack of shelter? Btw no words are spoken towards my perception when being dominated into the submission of adaptation.
educating people
Education under the umbrella of suggested scientism; implies once again choice (suggestion of information by teacher) to choice (consent to suggested information by student) contract law, which just so happens to led to "the clown world of scientism".
Meanwhile under natural law...to teach self implies to learn for self and vice versa. Others simply represent inspiration (need) or temptation (want) for choice within balance.
whether they like it or not
a) like vs not like represents the rebranded conflict of reason (want vs not want); which is caused by ignoring perceived balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want). This is how the few cause division (reason) by means of suggestion (-isms).
b) perception implies out of everything; your consent to suggestion is what causes you to ignore it for no; not; nothing; nothingness. Tell me...how does one perceive nothing? And if nature doesn't offer nothing towards our perception; then where did you get it from?
lmao
How does one process input from all without means of relief?
"free" will of choice represents the response to the "dom"inance of balance (free-dom) aka choice (sub) to balance (dom).
Perceived balance (offer) to choice (response) represents natural law; while choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) represents contract law in ignorance of natural law; also referred to as religion (from religio - to bind anew).
The only ones laughing their asses off are the ones you consent to submit your free will to. Question that.
i exercise my liberty assertively without reservation and only submit to God lmao thank you for continually educating people as whether they like it or not words are important lmao
Before the suggestible word comes the perceived sound. Those who consent to suggested (fiction) ignore perceived (reality). This is how the parasitic few control suggested narratives for the ignorant many consenting to them.
Instead of evaluating the suggested words as "important"; how about questioning "imported from where"? Could it be perceived sound?
Libertas; from liber - "free". As in "free" will of choice in response to "dom"inance of balance aka free-dom. Free implies within dominance; hence in response to it. It ain't "my liberty" but being "at liberty as choice to balance".
In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti. The "in nomine" (aka in the name of) represents your consent to their suggestion of "God"; hence being religion - "to bind anew" under choice (suggestion of religion) to choice (consent by faith) contract law.
Meanwhile under perceived natural law...if I go out and stand still, at what point do I need to consent to have faith in anything suggested? Will it happen after I'm forced by the natural order to respond to breathing; thirst; hunger and lack of shelter? Btw no words are spoken towards my perception when being dominated into the submission of adaptation.
Education under the umbrella of suggested scientism; implies once again choice (suggestion of information by teacher) to choice (consent to suggested information by student) contract law, which just so happens to led to "the clown world of scientism".
Meanwhile under natural law...to teach self implies to learn for self and vice versa. Others simply represent inspiration (need) or temptation (want) for choice within balance.
a) like vs not like represents the rebranded conflict of reason (want vs not want); which is caused by ignoring perceived balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want). This is how the few cause division (reason) by means of suggestion (-isms).
b) perception implies out of everything; your consent to suggestion is what causes you to ignore it for no; not; nothing; nothingness. Tell me...how does one perceive nothing? And if nature doesn't offer nothing towards our perception; then where did you get it from?
How does one process input from all without means of relief?