<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Member Training &#8211; Legitimate Government Force	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://treeoflibertysociety.com/member-training-legitimate-government-force/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://treeoflibertysociety.com/member-training-legitimate-government-force/</link>
	<description>Restoring liberty through faith and action</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2026 06:21:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Dennis Gilmour		</title>
		<link>https://treeoflibertysociety.com/member-training-legitimate-government-force/#comment-4997</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis Gilmour]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2026 06:21:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://treeoflibertysociety.com/?p=18060#comment-4997</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[You mention that government cannot do anything that ONE individual cannot do.  I agree that an individual and/or a group cannot delegate a right unless everybody has that right.  For example, I cannot use force to compel my neighbor to let me steal from him or he will be thrown in jail for refusing to let me steal from him.  I may be sincere in thinking that I have the right to steal from him, because I have a really good project that needs the funding and the majority on my block agree the project is good and needs to be funded.  So, the group overrides his protests and we just steal from him, under threat of jail if he does not comply.  Is this ok?  We can even give it a nice name called &quot;taxes&quot; to make the theft feel nicer, if there is such a thing.  The founding fathers said congress will have the right to do the tax thing, the very thing they rebelled against England for.  So the hypocrisy was there from the start.  And the declaration said all men are created equal, except black people, which were slaves.  You talk on and on about &quot;God says this or that&quot;..... but you only have Bible verses to spin to claim God says that.  The Bible is full of evil as well as good, same as every &quot;holy&quot; book.  It was written by flawed humans, so has flaws, and is as much a written document of flawed humans as the declaration of independence and constitution.  Bottom-line is you still think special exception needs be made for government, and government has special rights that individuals don&#039;t have.  You try to claim that is not your thinking, but clearly it is, when one can read between the lines.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You mention that government cannot do anything that ONE individual cannot do.  I agree that an individual and/or a group cannot delegate a right unless everybody has that right.  For example, I cannot use force to compel my neighbor to let me steal from him or he will be thrown in jail for refusing to let me steal from him.  I may be sincere in thinking that I have the right to steal from him, because I have a really good project that needs the funding and the majority on my block agree the project is good and needs to be funded.  So, the group overrides his protests and we just steal from him, under threat of jail if he does not comply.  Is this ok?  We can even give it a nice name called &#8220;taxes&#8221; to make the theft feel nicer, if there is such a thing.  The founding fathers said congress will have the right to do the tax thing, the very thing they rebelled against England for.  So the hypocrisy was there from the start.  And the declaration said all men are created equal, except black people, which were slaves.  You talk on and on about &#8220;God says this or that&#8221;&#8230;.. but you only have Bible verses to spin to claim God says that.  The Bible is full of evil as well as good, same as every &#8220;holy&#8221; book.  It was written by flawed humans, so has flaws, and is as much a written document of flawed humans as the declaration of independence and constitution.  Bottom-line is you still think special exception needs be made for government, and government has special rights that individuals don&#8217;t have.  You try to claim that is not your thinking, but clearly it is, when one can read between the lines.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
