Descriptions:
Video Description
In this special presentation recorded for the Freedom Under Natural Law 3 virtual conference, Mark Passio dismantles religion’s definition of sin and restores a working definition of true morality. Where institutional religion teaches seven so-called Seven Deadly Sins — pride, gluttony, sloth, lust, anger, jealousy, and greed — Passio shows these are merely vices performed upon the self, not transgressions against another being. The real seven deadly sins are offenses against Natural Law: murder, assault, rape, theft, trespass, coercion, and deception — acts that steal life, well-being, property, free will, and informed choice from other sentient beings. He argues that the true deadly sins have been occulted and swapped for trivial vices to keep humanity morally confused and spiritually enslaved, and that recovering accurate definitions of right, wrong, sin, and property is the first step back toward freedom.
Full Video Transcript
Welcome one and all. I’m Mark Passio of WaterOnEarthIsHappening.com. It’s a pleasure to be speaking here at the Freedom Under Natural Law 3 conference. I want to say thank you to Will Keller and all of the other organizers of this great event, and thank you to the other speakers for making this a really incredible event focused on natural law, objective morality, the occult, and many other absolutely vital topics for us to understand at this point in human history.
Today, my presentation is entitled, The Real Seven Deadly Sins, and I am emphasizing the
word real because there are, of course, false deadly so-called sins that we are told are
the true seven deadly sins, the true transgressions that we could perform upon our fellow men
and women, when in fact this is highly misleading and creates a lot of moral confusion in the
population. This is a topic that I have been wanting to discuss and formalize for actually
quite some time, so the Freedom Under Natural Law III conference presented this opportunity,
and I think it’s a perfect opportunity to expound on this very important topic. So let’s jump into
the presentation as always i begin my presentations with simple caveats for new viewers to my work
to attempt to understand the first thing is many people will say well there’s nothing really truly
new here this is all things that have existed and i fully agree um nobody should be expecting
anything new at this point tyranny is ancient slavery is ancient the real new thing is uh the
idea of freedom and it has not unfortunately it has not manifested in our world yet so i always
begin by telling people you will not be seeing or hearing anything new presented here today this is
simply the truth that has always existed as the ancient saying goes in many different mystery
traditions there is nothing new under the sun and what that statement means is that truth is
objective and eternal it has always been here and it will always be here it is for us to recognize
and unfortunately since we haven’t yet recognized it as a species nothing truly new is happening
here on our planet under the sun here on earth uh you know all i can do as a public presenter
is apply my own uh personalized framework and personalized aesthetics to uh concepts and ideas
that can help get them across better and help get them across to people in an interesting way and in
a way that you know looks attractive so people will be more liable to pay attention to it so
that’s my job here and that’s what i attempt to do but if you’re expecting anything brand new
you’re not going you’re going to be disappointed because this is truth that has always been here
among us uh as human beings for us to recognize the second caveat caveat that i always give
while delivering you know before delivering the body of a presentation is that um if you’re an
easily offended human being this information is probably not for you if you hear more of the tone
that something is delivered with uh and the style rather than the meat of the uh ideas rather than
the the moral of the story so to speak then you’re thinking from an emotional standpoint
you’re trying to think and reason with your emotions and thinking and reasoning doesn’t
actually work that way um you’re you’re prone to what i call emotional mind control or heart
control and that’s the problem with a lot of people so i always give this caveat before i
begin that my presentation style is often very abrasive it’s often intense and at times even
combative toward the viewer that’s uh you know because i recognize a lot of people are under
uh influence of their own thoughts through their emotions so i deliberately choose not to sugarcoat
my words and not to sugarcoat my delivery and that means some people who will watch this might
become angered and offended by it oh well that’s your problem so be it uh that will never make what
i’m about to say untrue i’m going to speak the truth in this presentation and the truth remains
the truth regardless of what anyone thinks about it truth by its very nature is actually a
belligerent energy because it wages war against all the forms of false indoctrination and mind
control that we’ve been through in our lives and therefore truth can be a very difficult thing for
people to hear and digest and come to a true understanding of nonetheless that’s what you’re
going to hear today and i’m not going to sugarcoat the delivery of that truth i’m going to say it
plainly and out in the open, as if you’re an intelligent adult human being that’s psychologically
mature and able to receive the truth, whether that’s the actual target audience or not.
So let’s jump in to the material. The first thing, if we’re talking about the real seven deadly sins,
that implies a few things. That implies, number one, that there is such a thing as quote-unquote
sin. And the second thing is it implies that there is a false definition of the deadly sins,
or sin in general. So the first thing I like to do when I’m fleshing out a presentation, and since
the subtitle of this year’s funnel conference is the Trivium, is we have to establish grammar,
right? Grammar is the first step of the Trivium, followed by logic. I’m going to present the true
seven deadly sins and the false ones from a perspective of pure logic, the second stage of
the Trivium. But the first stage is going to be how we have to establish the grammar in the Trivium
process, and that means we have to set definitions for the words that we’re about to use. So let’s
define sin. I went to the Oxford English Dictionary for a decent definition of the word sin, and I was
surprised that it actually gave a very good definition. So I used it here to start the slides.
Their definition of sin is an immoral act that is considered to be a transgression against divine
law obviously this is from a somewhat religious definition of the word sin i generally don’t use
the term sin when talking about the violations of natural law which we will get into that do
comprise transgressions against other sentient beings i tend to just call them harmful behaviors
but since we’re talking about the real seven deadly sins in this presentation as opposed to
false ones, I wanted to give a textbook definition of what is generally considered to be sin or
sinful behavior. And I thought that this definition was actually very well constructed, hence I’m
using it to define sin moving forward in this presentation. Sin is defined as an immoral act
that is a transgression against divine law. So let’s define some of the parts of that definition.
the word immoral an immoral act immoral simply means in conflict with moral principles or
wrong meaning a wrongdoing again something that is not a right something that initiates harm
against other sentient beings that’s what an immoral behavior is and in the usage as an
adjective it simply means that it is in conflict with what is right is in conflict with the general
principles of true objective morality. Then the word transgression, which was used in that
definition of sin given by the Oxford English Dictionary, the word transgression simply means
an act that goes against a law, an offense of some type. Again, very simple, very accurate definition
to be used going forward in the subject material when we use the word sin. This is what we’re
really talking about. So I think those established the definition pretty succinctly of what sin is
considered to be. So I have no problem with any aspects of those definitions. What I have a
problem with is what religiosity, what major world religions, what most religious people
consider sin to be in the world, because I think it’s a very false definition of the behaviors
that they categorize as sin and what that does is that paints in people’s mind uh a very inaccurate
picture of what true wrongdoing is then they don’t understand what wrongdoing is and they’re
more susceptible not only to perform wrongdoing but to condone others doing wrongdoing okay
so that’s why it’s so important to truly establish definitions of what we’re talking about then move
forward with an understanding of let’s understand how certain categories of
behaviors fall in line with this definition or do not fall in line with
it so let’s move on to the next slide what we’re talking about here overall
moving forward is sin is transgression against divine law and again if you
don’t like the term divine law use the term the laws of God the laws of the
creator i call it natural law in all of my work it’s moral law it’s the laws that define true
and objective morality these are the laws of cause and effect because they actually bring a result
into the human experience when we behave either in alignment with them or out of alignment with them
some people have called this consequentialism some people have called this karma the oldest
probably the oldest name for it is karma, coming from the ancient Indus Valley traditions of
what it means to conduct action in the world. Karma actually means action, and then the result
that you get from the taking of that action. So I find this to be purely in alignment with
the correct definition of what would be considered sin, and very much in alignment with natural law
principles so let’s let’s move on and uh talk about natural law now of course we can’t define
every aspect of natural law here in this presentation i took about eight and a half
hours to do that in my natural law seminar so let’s just do a brief review of what natural
law is because this is what karma is this is what the laws of cause and effect are this is what
god’s law or the creator’s law is this is universal law okay what we’re talking about here that sin
is a transgression against so as a general definition as a working definition natural
law is a set of universal inherent objective non-man-made eternal and immutable conditions
which govern the consequences of behaviors of beings with the capacity for understanding the
difference between harmful and non-harmful behavior so it’s universal everywhere present
no matter where you go in the universe inherent that means it’s part of nature it’s actually
embedded in the fabric of reality it is not a constructural idea in the mind it’s objective
that means it’s not based on human opinion or perception it’s not subjective it’s non-man-made
This is not made by any human beings. It is not made by society. It is not made by any groups of people. It is made by the universe itself. It is eternal. It exists for as long as the universe exists. It is immutable. It can never be changed by any action of anyone or anything.
and they are conditions which govern the consequences of behaviors these are moral
consequences that we receive when we act either in alignment with the laws of morality or out
of alignment with the laws of morality the understanding of natural law is centered upon
bringing our own conscience our knowledge of the difference between right and wrong
into alignment with objective morality it’s choosing moral behavior over immoral behavior
that is what it means to bring our behavior into alignment with morality so to do that means
definitively knowing which behaviors are rights because they do not initiate harm to other sentient
beings and knowing which behaviors are wrongdoings because they do initiate harm to other sentient
beings and as we will see that’s the very definition of right and wrong the problem is
most people don’t understand that they have completely falsified notions and ideas and
conceptual constructs in the mind of what right and wrong actually are. And I’m going to prove
that objectively with data from social experiments that we did. I’ll present those results in a
moment. So how does natural law actually function in the world? Well, when human beings in the
aggregate, in the collective, actually live in harmony with natural law and are therefore
are considered to be acting morally in the aggregate they become and remain free this is
how the laws of consequence of behavior work when human beings in the aggregate in the collective
overall live in opposition to natural law and are therefore overall immoral as a species they will
become and remain enslaved this is what i personally refer to as the law of freedom this
dynamic of natural law i call the law of freedom and here it is stated very simply as morality
increases freedom increases and as morality declines freedom declines this is how entire
civilizations either create a situation in which they live in freedom and harmony and peace together
or a civilization creates the situation that we are in right now tyranny covert enslavement moving
toward overt enslavement and ultimately extinction if the cycle continues and does not uh we do not
better ourselves and therefore better our condition as a species that’s how natural that’s
what natural law is that’s how natural law works in our world so this brings us to the crux of the
matter in understanding sin what are rights what is an actual human right a sin is something that
we do not have the right to perform we don’t have the right to conduct sin without negative
karmic consequence so if we know what our rights are by knowing what comprises sin what are the
wrongdoings which we’re going to get to then we will create freedom when we behave in alignment
with those laws of morality in the aggregate defining a right is one of the most important
things we can do and unfortunately it’s one of the things our society fails miserably at
and i’m proving that with social experiment results that we conducted back four years ago
in 2019 but nothing has really changed since then you could do it today and get the same results
i guarantee you will get the same results unless you’re doing it in a highly uh in a concentration
of highly enlightened beings which is a rarity to even have that assembled anywhere uh in human
society but if you’re in an environment such as that yes you’ll probably get skewed results if
you go out on any given street corner in any major city in america you’ll get these results i guarantee
you’ll get these results so we define a right in the correct way a right is an action that does not
initiate harm to another sentient being you are not beginning harming someone else if you don’t
do that there will be no problem there will be no trouble there will be no sin therefore there
will be no negative karmic consequence in the form of tyranny and enslavement when all of humanity
conducts their affairs that way and then condones other people doing that type of violence you know
which is where we’re at now so we did a social experiment result a social experiment in the year
2019 and the results that we got is that no one we asked out of the hundreds of people that we asked
could correctly define what a human right is zero out of all the people that we’ve ever asked
and this is anywhere we did it any city in the united states or actually anywhere else i haven’t
done it outside of the united states but guarantee you if you did it outside the united states you’re
going to get the same results um no one could correctly give the definition of what a right is
now my question in response to that is always the same if you cannot correctly define a right
How could you possibly ever expect to be able to keep your rights from being stripped away from you?
If you don’t even know what they are, how are you going to know that they’ve been stolen from you?
See, this is the problem in ignorance that we have in human society today.
So in the defining of a right, we actually immediately define the wrongdoings,
because we’re defining the right in the negative or the apophatic definition.
in theology when you study things uh from the perspective of what they are not this is called
apophysis or apophatic inquiry very interesting topic to look into from theological schools of
thought so we’re defining a right in the negative or an apophatic definition a right is an action
that does not initiate harm to another sentient beings by definition from that grammar using the
trivium we could easily see that what are wrongs then wrong true wrongdoings are rights which do
i’m sorry actions which do initiate harm to other sentient beings very simple we’re just inverting
the definition of a right if a right is an action that does not initiate harm wrongdoings are actions
that do initiate harm to other sentient beings this is almost kindergarten level logic here
right it’s it’s very simple it’s very non-complex it’s very easy to understand
most people should understand it unfortunately the mind control the social engineering the
brainwashing the conditioning that they’ve been through since you know they’ve basically come out
of their mother’s womb is so colossal that they cannot cannot even grasp simple definitions such
as this and they want to overly complexify things it’s very simple i didn’t say aligning our
behavior to it is necessarily easy but the definitions are quite simple if we’re being
honest with ourselves so moving forward if this is the simple natural law definition of what
wrongdoings are then we have to look at what we’ve been told about what the seven deadly sins actually
are because so many people have this in their religious programming that they believe morality
is something other than what it is and that’s the problem then it paints a bad idea when someone’s
trying to talk about morality because people who have been so inculcated with false definitions
from religion carry that into their understanding of what’s going on in the world and of natural
law and of true objective morality and then they confuse the two they conflate the two and it
brings a bad name to people who are trying to really explain how natural law and morality and
freedom are inseparably interconnected that’s why this is such an important topic to get right so
i felt it was so important i have to go back to you know things like what i presented in my fake
ass christians presentation i actually brought out the quote mascot you know this uh religionist this
dark evil priest who’s really giving people false religion and it’s really coming from the dark
occultists of our world uh again he’s you know basically telling giving people a false version
of morality telling people he’s the intercessor between god and man god and humanity and kiss his
hand why don’t you you know this is what all the attitude that really any clergy and priest class
take i’m better than you i’m more moral than you i’m closer to god than you you have to you have
to use me as an intercessor between you and god an intermediary a middleman nothing could be further
from the truth it’s all toxic and poisonous from a true spiritual perspective and real spirituality
and i feel it’s so important i brought him back into this presentation and i want to redefine the
word religion as a form of mind control that holds us back from evolving in consciousness
that holds us back from the recognition of truth and objective morality and natural law
the word religion itself is etymologically derived from the latin verb relegare meaning to tie back
to hold back from forward progress to bind it is a cult binding it is a spell and again this is
all religion not just cultural religions not just christianity islam judaism hinduism buddhism etc
you can name all of the cultural religions of the world but there’s still other religions
there’s the belief in authority that’s one of the biggest religions on earth there’s the belief in
government there’s worshiping money there’s worshipings quote unquote science even though
it’s all basically government grant money funded science it’s not true investigation into truth
of how the laws of reality really work and there’s many many many others people can make
all sorts of false idols they can make all sorts of things to turn into religion and pure uh you
know identity of self that they then cling to mercilessly with their with their uh with
religious fervor okay we’re talking about religion from the point of view of it holds people back
from an accurate understanding of truth regardless of what the topic that we’re talking about is
doesn’t have to be cultural religious ideas so in most cultural religions however they give us a
false definition of morality. This is why so many people are confused. This is why people don’t
understand objective morality. It’s largely due to religious beliefs, religiosity. By providing
these false definitions of immoral action, religion ultimately holds humanity back from
a correct understanding of natural law and true objective moral principles. This is why we’re
heading into tyranny and bondage and slavery. We don’t have accurate definitions of morality. We
don’t have the truth when it comes to what is an immoral behavior versus what are moral behaviors
religion is not helping with this task of unraveling this and coming to a correct understanding of it
it’s actually acting as a block to humanity’s forward progress and the understanding of
objective morality and that’s why i think it does so much harm in society so the seven deadly sins
of, quote, religion in the Roman Catholic ideology are as follows. Pride, gluttony, sloth, lust,
anger, jealousy, and greed. And if we look at these, it is not behaviors that we would say
we necessarily want to dwell in, live in continually, constantly engage, make the
driving impetus of our lives you know i would be the last person to say just go and recklessly
engage in these types of behaviors ceaselessly uh you’d have to be a fool to to condone that
right uh so i’m not saying that these are good things to perpetually behave uh in in this
modality of consciousness however i am taking exception to calling these things sin see this
is where religionists who have been indoctrinated and inculcated into their mind control belief
system would would take exception to what i’m saying i’m trying to tell people that these are
not sins in and of themselves if we constantly lived in these modes of consciousness they could
be an impetus for us to begin conducting real sin in and of themselves they are not sin per se
And this is where the logic of the trivium has to come into play, you see, because if we can’t apply the logical transforms to understand that these are behaviors that are conducted upon the self, not others, the definition of a sin, again, a transgression against natural law, is an action that does initiate harm against another sentient being, meaning they can’t be actions that we perform to ourself, okay?
if we do it to ourself, it can’t be defined as a sin. It is a vice. That is the difference between
a vice and a sin. And what Roman Catholic ideology in particular, and in general, most of the
Christian religious tradition, what I call churchianity, it is not true esoteric Christianity,
but churchianity, they give us these false definitions of sin. And in telling us that
these are immoral behaviors in and of themselves it leads to all kinds of confusion in the general
population about morality then when someone like myself comes along and says hey folks morality is
intimately and inextricably interconnected with human freedom you get a bunch of people that go
here’s another religious nutter no this isn’t religion this is a science defined by the trivia
method to help people understand objective morality so that they create freedom instead
of tyranny that’s what the understanding of natural law is a science in that sense i’m a
moral scientist i’m not a religionist i think religion is the root of our problems and religious
thinking needs to go away if we’re going to evolve as a species so please don’t confuse what i’m
saying with religion just because i’m talking about objective morality objective morality is
a scientific understanding not a religious belief and we’re going to prove this here so let’s look
at these behaviors in turn from a logical point of view here we’re applying the transforms of
step two of the trivium process logic okay so let’s look at each behavior in turn is pride a
behavior we do to someone else once again you wouldn’t want to constantly dwell in the in the
modality of counterproductive pride like thinking that you’re way better than you actually are and
you’re actually doing in the world right that’s not going to motivate you to do any better right
but if you have done really well from an objective point of view and you you have gotten what you want
accomplished and you’ve done it to the best of your ability and it’s very well done even from
other people’s perspective at you know assessing it all together and just about having agreement
universally that you’ve done a brilliant job you could take pride in that work okay it’s something
that is not necessarily the initiation of any harmful thing against another right counterproductive
pride you’re going to basically diminish what you could be doing better right that’s why there’s a
good form of pride there’s a bad form of pride but i don’t think anybody disputes that this is
an internal emotion that one feels toward oneself right we’re just applying this simple logic is
this done toward the self internally is it an emotion that exists purely internally within the
self or is it an action a behavior that you do outside of yourself toward someone else i don’t
think anybody’s going to say that pride itself is something that you do to someone else it is an
emotion pride is a noun it’s not a behavior it’s not a verb right so let’s look at gluttony gluttony
is overindulgence in food that’s self-indulgence that’s something you do to yourself that could be
a vice you could get sick you could get heavy and overweight and out of shape and in bad health
you know all kinds of bad things can come out of gluttony if i am gluttonous one day of the year
or maybe two or three it’s not going to undermine my health necessarily right so it’s like just
engaging in that behavior is not doing something harmful to someone else you could potentially if
it’s overboard do harm to the self but your body is your property as long as you’re not forcing
food down someone else’s throat in too large of an amount when they’re telling you they don’t want
that done to themselves then it’s not a harmful action against others and we can continue down
the line sloth by definition is inaction it’s the state of inaction it’s laziness okay now you could
say well maybe not taking any action when someone’s actually being having violence conducted
upon them you’re sort of complicit with the violence that’s a rare exception to the rule
sloth just generally means you’re lazy you’re in a state of inaction you’re not actively harming
someone else lust again it’s an internal emotion the desire for for sex the desire to you know
perceive others in a sexual way too much right lust is an internal emotion it’s not a behavior
that you’re doing to someone else rape if you went overboard with lust and then said i’m just
going to rape somebody because you know i feel like i have the right to engage in sexual activity
with them without their consent no that’s a crime that’s a transgression against natural law lust
in and of itself an internal emotion not an outward behavior toward others so it cannot be
a transgression against others anger again an internal emotion different kinds of anger anger
over trivialities and nonsensical things just because you want to placate your emotions or
or rage against something that isn’t even really truly important in the world just from your own
whims you know that’s counterproductive anger right righteous indignation about a matter of
true justice in our world that’s a righteous form of anger that could compel someone to then take
true right action against injustices and iniquities in our world so anger could be a
positive thing but again i don’t think anyone would argue it’s not an act against others it’s
an internal emotion jealousy the same thing another internal emotion i could be jealous of someone
else’s skill sets as a presenter and say boy i wish i had that ability boy i wish i had that
that knowledge and know-how boy i wish i could present like that and make slides like that
that’s just an internal emotion they might never even know that i’m jealous of them
and it could compel me to go and do good things right so bad jealousy is like you’re worried
about trivial things you’re you know just want just wanting uh you know what other people have
just because they have it and you don’t you know and just physical possessions you know and it’s
like then okay if it leads to you going and saying i’m going to take something from someone else well
then that’s theft then that’s a transgression but the internal emotion of jealousy itself is not a
sin it cannot be because it’s not even an action jealousy is an emotion it’s not an action this is
where the confusion of emotion and action comes into play and that plays such a big role in how
our society doesn’t understand true morality and then greed another form of self-indulgence like
gluttony right but just with things and possessions and again that’s that is a form of a behavior but
it’s not an action that’s taken against others okay we have to understand if we are doing these
behaviors to ourselves they are vices these are definitions of vices of specific instances of
vices and there’s many others but vices themselves are not immoral acts against others okay this is
something again you wouldn’t want to dwell in all the time that might debauch and debase the self
but it’s still not violence against others it’s not violating anyone else’s natural rights
so let’s look at the real seven deadly sins the heart of the entire presentation here
what does constitute violations of natural law and others rights look at the qualitative difference
in the words the words pride gluttony sloth lust anger jealousy and greed compared to the real
seven deadly sins the false seven deadly sins don’t even rate when it comes to the level of
harm and evil that results from these types of behaviors the real seven deadly sins the real
violations of natural law murder assault rape theft trespass coercion and deception i think
anyone logically even looking at the qualitative difference between the vices versus the real sins
if they’re being honest with themselves is going to realize there’s zero comparison these are the
real deal when it comes to harm and they all share one basic thing in common so let’s look at some of
these from a logical perspective we’re going to look at what is the act of murder just like we
look what is pride what is taking pride in oneself what is gluttony what is sloth what is lust and on
So let’s look at these in turn. A very logical procedure. The part of the trivium process we’re engaging here is we’re asking the question, who, what, and then eventually we come to how and why.
okay we’re looking at why these now are actual transgressions against others because something
has to be done in order for a transgression against someone else to have taken place
not thought not felt but acted upon that’s why sins are actions sins aren’t thoughts sins aren’t
emotions sins are actions and you know quite frankly i really shouldn’t have to even explain
this to people who say that they’re people who are spiritual slash even religious people who
want to take the laws of the creator into the universe this should be common sense you know
and that’s the definition of conscience conscience literally means common sense when we etymologically
break it down into con meaning together or with and science meaning to know or to understand and
this is the problem is we’ve lost the common sense of what the true sins are what violations
against natural law are and that’s why we do them and we continue to condone when other people do
them namely when government performs these behaviors we say that’s perfectly justifiable
and acceptable because they have some kind of magical rights that everyone else doesn’t have
or we not having those rights have delegated them to this group of people who now magically have
turned wrongs into rights it’s it’s utter ridiculous religious nonsense of course and
this is how people have to come to perceive it so let’s look at these in turn from the logic
perspective of the trivium murder is the theft of life without having the right to take someone
else’s life there is such a thing as the rightful ability to kill in self-defense but that is not
murder that is a killing done in self-defense when we talk about murder it is the theft of life
without right so you have stolen something that doesn’t belong to you namely the life of another
being when you did not have the right to do that that’s what murder is assault is the theft of
well-being without right now if i defend myself against assault that’s not assault that’s the
right of self-defense being engaged with so again you can’t do murder but you can kill in self-defense
you can’t do assault but you can defend yourself with physical force in self-defense the next
wrongdoing under natural law the next sinful behavior is rape again like we said lust is an
inward emotion but rape is an external action done to another that’s the theft of sexual association
that one has the right to engage with so you’re taking another form of property from someone else
like their life their well-being and now their sexual association simple theft the act of taking
something that doesn’t belong to you is the unrightful taking of someone else’s property.
Again, you’re taking something that doesn’t belong to you. Trespass, you’re taking security
of another being within their living domain, their living space, their rightful property.
That’s the theft of someone else’s security. You’re taking something that doesn’t belong to
you. Coercion, that’s the theft of someone else’s free will to make their own decisions in life,
so long as their actions are not harming other people this is what government always advocates
for this is what the supporters of government always advocate for the taking of someone else’s
free will when they have not harmed someone else coercion and duress are threats of violence if
you don’t comply to the commands of another claiming to be the authority over you that’s
theft of free will that’s one of the most important ones in the in the seven deadly sins that
unfortunately goes largely unrecognized in our world and not seen as a sin and all unfortunately
condoned by people who consider themselves uh people who are saying that they want to follow
the laws of the creator and then finally we have deception the theft of someone else’s informed
decision making because you’re giving them false information misinformation lies and willingly
doing that knowing that they’re false and misleading so that someone else makes incorrect
decisions and that is the commonality between all of the wrongdoings listed from a logical
perspective they all share one common characteristic you’re taking something by engaging in those
behaviors you are taking something that does not belong to you rightfully you are stealing you are
engaging in theft theft is the root of all sin if theft is not taking place there is no transgression
taking place and this is a very difficult one for most people to see it’s because they haven’t
logically thought it through with the trivium process to a great enough extent and this is the
crux of the entire presentation folks religious people want to say that things are immoral when
if that behavior has been engaged in and conducted nothing has been stolen one of the examples i
always give even though i don’t engage in it and it’s not my preference homosexuality is a right
to say that someone cannot engage in a consensual behavior with another adult is trying to coerce
them against their free will whether you like the behavior or not whether it suits you whether you
find it comfortable or you know uh something that is uh within your preferences it doesn’t matter
how you want to word it it’s not somebody doing something harmful to someone else see so it can’t
be considered immoral immoral means someone’s rights are being violated so in a consensual
sexual act between uh you know homogeneous beings in gender how could it be a an immoral act
it’s immoral only when it’s forced upon another when it’s initiated without consent if it’s
consensual between adults it’s it’s a moral behavior because that’s the definition of
morality an action that does not initiate harm against another rape is not simple homosexual
behavior if one man rapes another man that’s rape if one man rapes a woman that’s rape if a woman
rapes a woman that’s rape the the act is non-consensual the act is initiating harm against
another that’s rape any form of consensual sexuality between two people that’s a right
religious can get as upset as they want about that you’re still wrong the problem is people
don’t understand the actual breakdown of what moral behavior means versus what it’s not that’s
the problem so since theft is the root of anything that is an immoral behavior what by definition
from a logical standpoint must be the root of virtue the understanding of property property
and its understanding is the root of all virtuous behavior if we truly understand what we really own
versus what we really don’t own most of the violence of the world will go away in the snap
of a finger overnight practically and this is the problem people don’t understand property and
property rights all rights are property rights all virtue stems from understanding what our
property is versus what it is not so ultimately in the in the in the in the very end analysis
in our rhetoric right we did the grammar stage of the trivium in the first part of the
presentation the logic stage in the middle and this has to be our rhetoric this has to define
our behavior moving forward if we truly understand what the real seven deadly sins are and what the
real transgressions against natural law truly are. Ultimately, learning and applying objective
morality and natural law is 100% entirely about understanding what one’s rightful property
truly is versus what one’s rightful property absolutely and definitively is not. The
understanding of rights all stems from the understanding of property and that’s why the
word proper or rightful is in the word property and the suffix ty etymologically if you research
it actually means power true power true power stemming from what is right literally is what
the word property means if you break it down etymologically which is why the understanding
of words is beautiful you know because it helps us to really understand what they mean in spirit
if we fully understand and value our rightful property then we will naturally extend that
accurate understanding to the property of all other sentient beings we will not violate their
life we will not violate their rights we will not violate their freedom we will not violate
their property rights we will not coerce them we will not deceive them we will not steal from them
we will not diminish them that is what our rhetoric is to do once we understand we have
the grammar in hand and we understand logically what rights are and what they are not our behaviors
have to be brought into alignment with them through a full understanding of property and in
doing so we will then as a species hopefully cease to violate the one true law of morality
don’t steal don’t take that which does not belong to you to take don’t condone it when others are
doing it then we might move into a free and prosperous world based on real justice based
on natural law ladies and gentlemen thank you so much for your kind attention in this presentation
and i’m very proud to have been part of funnel three this year have a good one
Source: Mark Passio