Justin Bieber is pleading with female teen fans from around the world to obey him by protesting against marriage licenses, marriage laws, and divorce courts.
"Please, you need to fix the legal system so the world could live in peace," said Bieber.
Bieber argues that the American judiciary is abusing the American people with marriage licenses, marriage laws, and divorce courts.
"In the constitution it says that slavery will not be tolerated and yet marriage licenses, marriage laws, and divorce courts commit the act of slavery when they impose their authority on the union of a man and woman, yet the judiciary and the state don't impose their authority on the union of free animals in the wild," said Bieber.
Bieber may have a good argument because any impedance between the free union and free separation of men and women could alter evolution in a negative manner. For example, the impedance alters the evolutionary compatibility between human male and female organisms when it bringing together the DNA of incompatible partners lured by marriage perks. The end result is more incompatible offspring. The expense of divorce and the desire to retain marriage perks also prevents a fluid separation causing the birth of more incompatible DNA.
It could even justify the genocide of human beings like what Hitler did during the war when he separated Jewish men and women into separate camps, so they wouldn't breed. All these things impeded the union of men and women which halted their natural breeding pattern and halted the birth of Jewish children.
The Nazis felt they had a right to subjugate the union of couples because of their history of issuing marriage licences, of using marriage laws, and of using divorce courts. All these things are illegal because they violate the blessings of liberty when state and judicial restraints are given through law.
The constitution doesn't authorize marriage licenses, marriage laws, and divorce courts. The constitution does condemn the subjugation of male and female couples through the use of marriage licenses, marriage laws, and divorce courts, because it's against Amendment XIII, section 1 of the constitution. Unmarried couples are free from the subjugation and so should other couples be free as well.
When the union is of a consensual nature nobody can dictate what the couple can do with each other. "Marriage licenses, marriage laws, and divorce courts are illegal and the state government needs to be held accountable for their gross violations of the constitution," said Bieber.
The violation of slavery is even more serious when the courts use the police and the jail system to enforce their illegal marriage laws.
When the government gives rights and benefits to married couples and not to unmarried couples the congress is violating the 14th amendment: "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Rights and benefits are being given to married couples while the constitution is being violated and the state is imposing slavery on men and women who are subjected to laws pertaining to marriage.
If a person has to go to court to file for divorce that is a subjugation of a person's will. If a person is offered a marriage license that is a subjugation of a person's will because it puts the person under the condition of slavery by the state and the judiciary. If a person is offered a marriage license with the lure of benefits from the government that is double the subjugation of a person's will because state laws are used as a snare or trap to place the victim under the subjugation of the state, or under the condition of slavery.
Since the constitution is an active mandate, any spouse can invoke the Constitution at any moment and they don't have to appear in court for any divorce proceedings and the case would be considered frozen which means no judgment can be given unless the spouse decides to show up in court. The spouse might not show up in court for 100 years and the case would remain frozen without judgment for 100 years. No judgment can be given because the divorce court is in violation of the constitution and it's considered an illegal court.
If a couple is together and one dies, the estate of the deceased should go to the children and if the couple didn't have children it should go to the parents, and if the parents are deceased then it should go to the siblings. If a man or a woman in the union want the estate to go to their partner then that person would have to write a will. If a partner is not placed on a will then that spouse can file a case in court for 1/3 of the estate if that partner was a homemaker. If the partner worked or co-owned a business then that spouse would not be entitled to 1/3 of the estate, in all fairness.
"They have medical specialist that give people marriage counseling; the courts should deal with law," said Bieber
Men and women can engage in any type of marriage they want with conditions set on a paper, but that paper cannot be used in court to separate the couple or to keep the couple together. The courts could solve issues of child custody and financial responsibilities over biological children. The courts could solve issues over personal and real property or joint partnerships in a business, but those issues can not be attached to marriage or unions because it would violate the constitution. In the future, several thousand years from now, this is how these issues will be resolved because it is logical.
Concerning immigration, the department of immigration can protect themselves from illegal immigration by having papers filed to show a union between a person and their foreign spouse. If there is a separation of the union within two years then the foreign spouse would lose their legal immigration status and they would have to return to their country of origin. A person and their foreign spouse would be allowed to unite and separate without restrictions but under the rules of the department of immigration. The purpose of the union is to raise a family and anything out of that purpose would be illegal. There is no slavery because people can unite and separate at will and they would return to their original state before the union.
Constitutional law as stated in Amendment XIII, section 1, goes as follows, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
The definition of slavery goes as follows, "The condition of being subject or addicted to a specified influence."