top of page


"This whole idea is crazy!  I've never seen something this nutty!  You're out of your mind!  I don't even know where to begin telling you how crazy you are!"

Well now.  We appreciate your candor.


Since nothing we say right now is likely to calm your hysteria, we won't try to defend our model (just yet).  Instead, we'll show you how crazy YOUR model is.

That's right:  As crazy as we might be, you're even crazier!


If you reject Natural Law, then you probably believe in the Nation-State Model (the idea that law is made by nation-states).  And the Nation-State Model is downright insane.

Here are some reasons why:

1.  Length:

Do you know how many laws your nation-state has?  In some countries (like the USA for example), nobody actually knows how many laws there are!


If you call the Department of Justice, the Library of Congress, the FBI, the US Congress hotline, or any office in the entire government, no one can answer the simple question of how many laws there are.

Here's a picture of what your so-called "law code" looks like:


There are so many laws in the USA, that you're definitely breaking several right now.  It's actually impossible to exist without breaking multiple laws, codes, and statutes continuously.  As long as you exist, you're a criminal, and there's nothing you can do about it.

THAT's crazy, isn't it?

By comparison, here's what the Law of the Earth looks like:


Which seems crazier - a law that you can carry in your pocket, and reference whenever you need it - or a law that can't be transported without a truck?

2.  Complexity:


The existence of "attorneys" proves that the Nation-State Model is crazy.


You have an entire profession devoted to figuring out how your "law" system works, because no one else understands it.  You have to study intensely for 20 years, just to begin to understand it - and even then, you'd only have a grasp on one branch or field of it.  No one understands the entire thing.  No one.

Here's the question: 


If your "law" is so complex that ordinary people can't understand it, then isn't it obvious that your "law" has something wrong with it? ​​​​​​​


3.  Time-Dependence:


Each one of your "laws" has a birthdate - a date before which it didn't exist.


Before that date, an activity could be perfectly OK, and after that date, it's a horrible crime.


Or vice versa!  Something could be a horrible crime today, and perfectly OK tomorrow.


At 11:59 PM, right and wrong are one way, and at 12:01 AM, two minutes later, right and wrong are completely different.


That doesn't make ANY sense, does it?  It's crazy.   

The Law of the Earth has no date of passage; it simply IS.  It has always existed, and has always been the same.


4.  Place-Dependence:


Every nation-state has a different set of "laws."  Which one is correct?

Nation-states "solve" this problem by applying each set of "laws" to a different area of land.  If you go from one nation-state to another - or one province to another - or even one city or township to the next - right and wrong change.

You can cross a river, and right and wrong are different on the other side of the river.



The very nature of morality - what it means to be a good, decent person - changes because you stepped across a river?

How can that be?  That's crazy!  


5.  Saintly Dictatorships

Where do Human Rights come from?  

Do they come from Nature?  Are they intrinsic?

Or... do they come from government?  Do we only have rights if our government decides we do?

Ponder this:

North Korea and Saudi Arabia are undisputed violators of human rights.  

Everyone agrees they violate human rights on a massive scale.  

In North Korea, you can legally be tortured to death for criticizing the leader, reading the Bible, or even watching a movie. 

And in Saudi Arabia, you can be executed for being a blogger, questioning Islam, or walking outside with your skin showing (if you're female). 

You might be thinking these are horrible violations of human rights.  But they're not.  Not according to the Nation-State Model (the thing you claim to believe in).

This is because, according to your model, human rights come from government.  People only have human rights if their government gives them human rights.

And totalitarian regimes never gave their people human rights.


Saudi Arabia never gave its people human rights.

Nazi Germany never gave its people any human rights.


Stalin never recognized any human rights.  Pol Pot didn't either.

Since they never gave their people any rights, their people never had any rights.

And if the people never had any rights, then there is nothing for the government to violate. 

Caption:  A bunch of men who never violated any human rights (according to the Nation-State Model of lawmaking)


In other words:

If the government is the source of rights...
And the government doesn't believe you have any rights...
Then you don't have any rights...
Because the government never gave you any...
So there are no rights for the government to violate...
Because you don't have any...
Because the government hasn't given you any...

Therefore, no dictator has ever violated human rights, because the very definition of a dictator is someone who doesn't believe in human rights.  And if the dictator doesn't believe in human rights, then the people, by definition, don't have any.  And so there aren't any rights for the dictator to violate.

That's INSANE.

Just admit it. Don't try to deny it. 

The Law of the Earth, in contrast, recognizes that human rights are innate.  They don't come from government - they come from existence.  We're born with them.  We don't need the government to give us rights - we already have the full roster.  And the government can never, ever abolish them.  No legislation can ever negate them.  It's not within the government's authority to do so. 

Doesn't that sound more sane?

6.  No Limits

The kinds of "laws" that the nation-state can pass are limitless.  The government can make, literally, ANYTHING legal. 

Theft?  Sure, as long as you're stealing the right amount from the right people.

Murder?  OK, as long as you pass a law to make it legal.

Rape?  Well, why not?  Just make sure you get a majority consensus first. 

You can even make child molestation legal, if you get enough votes.

There is NO limit on what the Nation-State Model allows nation-states to do.

That's crazy.

So now you see, we're not the crazy ones.  What's crazy is what you've been taught, all your life, by governments and their indoctrination. 

Considering just how crazy the Nation-State Model is, wouldn't you be interested in a different model?  Well, we've got one.  Right here.  It's called The Law of the Earth. 

If you still don't quite agree, or you don't quite see how the logic works out, you can visit our Objections Menu.  Whatever your particular argument is, chances are, it's already been addressed.  Check it out:

Thanks for reading!

bottom of page