Quote Originally Posted by Jethro View Post
I would tend to agree with your analysis, Michael. But let me throw a few concepts and scenarios at you to see if this may coax you to look at it another way...

1. Can the right to contract supersede other "inviolate rights"? e.g. Can the right to vote be waived via contract?

2. What if the conduct complained about between the "arbitration clause parties" is unlawful? e.g. If it is alleged the defendant committed conversion of property or fraud, there is no contractual provision for that conduct. That is, unlawful conduct falls outside the scope of a contract. Would a suit for damages suffered due to unlawful conduct "bypass" the arbitration clause, or would such claims still be required to be arbitrated?

3. What if the "arbitration clause party" effectively enjoys a monopoly? For example, a utility company or performance rights organizations -- there is no where else to turn for the essential service you need, or a small group of companies that have an effective monopoly all have "arbitration clauses". These companies owe their existence and monopoly to the same government(s) that guarantee inviolate rights. In such a case, how can it be deemed that a "choice" to enter into such a contract and waive one's rights is truly "voluntary"?
Hello Jethro,

Thank you for responding. Years ago I noticed that registering to vote was an act that required my input. Meaning that I was not automatically registered just because it is presumed that I am part of a society. I had to physically cause the registration by my deed and my signature. Implied and Express Trust. In the beginning I saw voting as a duty but today I see in a different light. A vote in any society be it within a private corporation is only allowed by those who have standing to vote. Meaning that the shareholders of General Motors vote in regard to the affairs of General Motors. I see that simple expression at the crux of the matter.

I find that my trust is very valuable so I refuse to sell myself by way of deed in voting. So I wrote the county registrar and asked that the account held in voting be removed from the rolls. No problem, it was removed. Now I don't vote. A right to vote depends on the society - finding I am not a shareholder in General Motors, I lack a right to vote in its affairs.

By removing myself from the possibility of voting, I have waived that right and once the registration is terminated by my own input [remember it was my input which made the registration] then I may not vote. Does my right stand violated? I think not.

To violate one infers force of action. So if I am compelled by force upon a deed then I may claim tort or violation. However, if by my own freewill I choose to be a member of a particular society as citizen, then I chose. Perhaps I choose to declare a new society whereby my status will elevate from citizen to statehood either way I choose. If I enter into a contract and the terms agreed upon by all parties stipulate arbitration or mediation vs. litigation, then I must comply with my agreement. I see your point and there is ALOT of gray area in here for I might foresee an employee that is raped for instance - does the employee only have access to arbitration?

So I can appreciate your issue and I can see both sides of the argument. But this is in my opinion the fruits of man's inventions. For I find that in the Scriptures such an offense would require at the witness of two immediate death of the rapist without consideration of "circumstances". However is man has become an Outlaw in regard to Torah how then will he argue for protection under Torah regarding God given rights? Man is left with his agreements to his good or his harm.

Regarding Monopolies such as energy companies - Electricity - etc., I am about the work of designing a house that I intend to construct so that I have no further debt. Our goal is to have a wood stove located where heat will be drawn into the house by the air circulating systems. We intend to construct solar panels and geothermal systems [wells] to obtain electricity and to get better efficiency of heat transfer in regard to the heat pump. Our goal is to sell energy back to the Electrical company. We intend to construct sustainable cycles on the farm such that energy is transferred and not wasted. I look at the typical family in residential America. They eat their food delivered in plastic containers and then they discard the container and most of the uneaten food [minus what the dog is allowed] into the trash. This is a severe breach in the energy cycle - a complete waste.

By changing just a couple of strategies one becomes connected to the earth and disconnected with the mechanisms of commerce. If I go to a grocery store, I have no idea how the food being sold was grown. But if I grow it myself, I know with a surety the value. For instance Milk in the store is worthless as it is Pasteurized and Homogenized and those processes render the milk [in my opinion] worthless. But milk straight from the cow [raw] has great value as the anti-bodies is that milk are alive.

Please bear with my folly as I see this as connected in the philosophy of how one lives. It is about my trust. I don't trust the grocery store, so I am very careful about what I buy from those stores - which is very little. So Food, Inc. has nothing in me. I don't go to church so Religion, Inc. has nothing in me. I do not work for another man so Employment, Inc. has nothing in me. I do not sit at the feet of any guru so Education, Inc. has nothing in me. God granted me a mind so I weigh matters - and if I can't live with the terms, then I novate the contract.

Years ago i was on Texas and I took a contract for a rental car - so upon reviewing the contract - I crossed out some terms and wrote NO over them, I then qualified my signature with "Absent liability assumed and without recourse, by: Signature". Now later when I returned the vehicle the employee tried to say that a scratch that already existed was my liability. I then told him that according to the contract I signed he was wrong. He made a "big stink" and got obstinate but I patiently stood and suggested he have his boss review the contract. Upon a ten minute review the employee returned and said "have a nice day". I imagine there was a "policy" change effective immediately - but even if that was true - NOONE is going to tell me how to sign anything! That is my own deed and I will do it like I want to do it.

I desired hospital treatment - but I just could not live with the terms - so I just "X[ed]" them out and refused to be guarantor for payment. I refuse to pay. The service was rendered free of charge and the ER even wanted to perform a MRI - just to make sure. Turned out I had "strep throat". They even provided the anti-biotics free of charge. I told them the truth - I am a living soul, in Jesus Christ. If they want payment they can ask Jesus Christ for it.

Understand me I am not discounting the "gray area" and I know it exists and I hate it. But this is the fruit of a system where men standing at the head are compromised by money. For the debtor is slave to the lender. So in a sense I am not job[ed] out to another man but in another sense I am in the service of all men. For when you drive over an overpass [bridge] that I designed you benefit. When you drink water from a waterline system I designed you benefit. So my duties are compensated but where did I waive my interest in the future uses? Therefore I am in the service of my King [Yehoshuah] and my fellow living souls.

Returning full circle - if there is a clause in a contract that I cannot live with - I will novate it - but that does not mean the service provider is subject to my decrees. My novation may mean no service. However, if my Signature is an UNDERTAKING then I will certainly promise to perform only those duties that I may wish to subject myself to. If you look around you will find many of the so called contracts [two party] are in reality just undertakings [one party]. So if I choose to subject myself in my promises according to an agreement produced by another, then great. But I should do it carefully.

Furthermore in regard to my rape example, the Company might attempt to limit its liability by way of the Agreement in Arbitration; however, that in no way limits the liability of the individual. Therefore the charge of rape would issue in the Admiralty in Common Law. Like I said "gray area".

I worked as a Professional Engineer as president for an engineering company for years. We routinely helped our clients understand construction contracts which required arbitration and mediation. The contractor and the developer were both required to carry a certain amount of insurance for liability concerns and also bonds [payment and performance]. Many times I found myself called to hearings to provide testimony. The idea is of course that the matter might be settled in the hands of competent souls who have experience in construction. I myself would hate to be at the mercy of 12 idiots who can barely read.

Therefore I make a Use of the Trust. So that the estate might be preserved from an unwarranted taker. So I enjoy and appreciate arbitration and mediation; however, I do see your point. All circumstances cannot be resolved by the use of any system.

However INVIOLATE is a long way from UNALIENABLE. I can transfer a right without being violated. Of course what does God mean to an atheist and his evolution model - very little. Without God - anything goes! For there can be no God given or unalienable rights without God.

Shalom,
Michael Joseph