Well, that's a good thing. But in all honesty, the authors of these websites need a little more study and a little more developement of their material. The first problem is the confusion about political process versus judicial process. It does not matter if an amendment or law was improperly ratified ... that is a political issue. The better argument is that the amendment or law cannot be proposed ... that is a judicial issue to which people must devote their attention. If there is ever hope to pursue a solution through the judicial branches of the US and State governments, then the right argument must be made. Second, there are legal precursors to the 14th amendment. In other words, there are reasons why the 14th amendment could be considered a valid amendment to the US Constitution. Without knowing or studying what these are, how far back they go or taking their existence for granted, the real issue before us will not be resolved. There are also facts in these persons' lives which makes their argument moot! A little bit of knowledge can be dangerous so study the issues completely. Third, it is difficult to know the minds of these people if they are looking for the whole truth or only want to share part of it so they don't drive off their sponsors. It's been said of Glenn Beck that he knows more than he's saying but has a multi-million dollar business to keep running, too. Other talk show hosts come to mind ... These objections are made in the vein of constructive criticism as they are all starting points for discussion which can bring forth greater understanding of their positions. Do your own study, consider the research and analysis presented on beholdonline.info, study these other websites and correspond with their authors about your agreement or disagreement. WRING OUT THE SUBJECT!

"The powers of government were never given the jurisdiction to do the things they are doing today. Many laws, taxes, restrictions and government powers come from this post-constructional (89 years later) jurisdiction. Abortion, Roe V. Wade, prayer in school, gun control are all fruits of the tree of this unlawful and unconstitutional jurisdiction. I will demonstrate, with facts and freely available documents, how this unconstitutional jurisdiction came to be and how to fix it." - Bruce Ray Riggs at dirtyunclesam.com and proveitsreal.com

This man may have good intentions but is just a babe lost in the woods. There's hope, though ... North Carolina's Donald Sullivan says the Constitution gives us the right to travel ~ Wins in Court

[Coming soon on beholdonline.info is a big discussion of traffic, driving and right to travel.]

John Ainsworth explains the untold history of why the government today operates without Constitutional limitations. Part 1 of 9   Mr. Ainsworth lays the blame on the 14th amendment.

(from the youtube.com notes) Special thanks to NCFreedom.us for making this presentation possible for the Constitutional Town Hall at the Lighthouse Convention Center in Raleigh, NC.

John Ainsworth website.

Chuck Baldwin is a preacher who is very, very, very slowly introducing suspicion about the 14th amendment. He does not respond to email about the subject to discuss it any further. Chuck Baldwin Live.

His son Timothy Baldwin wrote the book Freedom for a Change. [Not yet read or reviewed on beholdonline.info]

"Our Oath is to the Constitution," yet little do they understand what has happened to the US Constitution since the supposed ratification of the post-Civil War amendments, nor to their altered, repealed or supplanted State Constitutions. Oath Keepers

Have memorized everything said or done by the Forefathers but haven't studied anything that's happened since then which negates what they say. Wall Builders

On the right track but not seeing how far they need to go: National States Rights Coalition wants to repeal the 17th amendment to restore State Sovereignty.

[Behold Online Editor's Note: In light of history from the Civil War era forward, the 17th amendment is a continuance of, and further confirmation of, the Reconstruction Period. The purpose of the Reconstruction amendments was to alter the form of government set up by the Forefathers. When several of the southern States refused to ratify the 14th amendment to continue the change begun in section 2 of the 13th amendment, Congress declared those States to be in rebellion and sanctioned them until they ratified the 14th amendment. After that, States did not object to the 15th, 16th and 17th amendments. If a State today were to begin the repeal of the 17th amendment, then that State could be considered in rebellion of the Reconstruction government set up by Congress beginning with the 13th amendment. Problems did not start with the 17th amendment but rather the 17th amendment was only ratified in the vein of continuing Reconstruction. The attack on the 17th amendment cannot be made in isolation of many other provisions of the altered US Constitution, the altered State Constitutions and the altered legal status of the People.

The 17th amendment could be considered a public display that there are no States in existence like the original States which participated in the original government of the United States. Since the 13th amendment, there are no true States in the original sense. Likewise the 16th amendment, which has been said granted no new taxing power, only recognizes that there are no Citizens of the several States which would merit apportionment of the taxes among the States because only a national citizenship is recognized by the 14th amendment. The amendments after the 13th are only clarifying amendments which flesh out the change in government made by the 13th amendment. Whether the 14th and later amendments exist or not, all of the unlawful expansion of Congress' power can be found in the 2nd section of the 13th amendment; this is alluded to in the case of U.S. v. Rhodes.]

(This page contains many subjects under developement which are not yet linked to other pages. Please check back for further progress. The underlined words DO link to other pages.)