Truth on Restraining Orders. Undertaker, 2004.

Hello. Now that formality is aside, be assured I do not personally care for you at all. That was, after all, just a formality.

I will now begin digging deep to produce the Truths behind the document called a "Restraining Order."
I present it is a completely illegitamite perverse and insane document. It will take some thinking to reveal just why society and the social leadership have allowed such a thing to come about.

First it must be fully revealed what exactly I mean by perverse and illegitimate. In nature there is never such thing as a restraining order. While that is a little obvious, it still needs a mention. A Restraining Order and the miles of red-tape, social moral values and legal jargon is a totally artificial contruct created by society. As you look at the words "artificial contruct" bring the fact that there is no natural basis for any restraining order to the forefront of your Mind. Artificial means made by man, unnatural. Construct means the "building"of one value based on another to make a total mental "construction", just like a wall is built with bricks one by one, all supporting each other.

So not only is the restraining order unnatural and man-made but it is based on a rather delicately balanced house of cards, and each card represents a moral or ethical value or a law. Some of these things are moral theories that the moralists claim are rock-stable, but in fact go back before the birth of Jesus. Aristotle and Plato, who lived B.C. came up with a "moral" theory that man can do wrong knowing it to be wrong because of a "moral-weakness". This was never proved nor studied properly at all. Yet today, society accepts it (or pretends to) and often uses it as a foundation for its further values.

I believe that this makes the restraining order a document without proper basis.
However, I still have more to law down before I can tell you why I label it perverse and illegitimate. There are as usual the Poison-Container and True-Reality terms I need to define, as well as My
Right-To-Balance principal and the Revenge Artist term. Thats four in all, so strap yourself in.

All social relations have a logical reason as to why we act the way we do. We are actually animals with intincts for survival and emotional needs. I believe that we all have a part of us which is a self-value. It can be bigger or smaller and it gives us a spiritual strength. However, at times we may be abused, hurt, fail or even sexually abused over a period of time. Raped, rejected. This severly depleted the "amount" of this self-worth and will-power. Think of it like an amount.

If a person suffers from anxiety and unwanted emotional torments, he/she may try to project or transfer these unwanted torments into another person, so as to relieve his unpleasant or neurotic state. This is catharsis. I will often refer to these torments as cathartic torments. The person on the recieving end of the catharsis is "taking it" and can be called a poison container. He has his container made to be "fuller" while the other person is making himself less tormented and relieving his unpleasant state, albeit at the cost of the other person. This may sound horrible, but remember that the person who "dished it out" was in turn abused/victimised in such a way as he had a need to do so in the first place.

I would like to make clear that even though two people who theoretically experianced the exact same event, whether positive and nuturing or completely truamatic, will have thier own completely unique personal interpretation, understanding and the experiance will have a completely unique effect on the person.

This totality of all unpleasant experiance, along with the positive and more neutral experiances, makes up, in total, a persons True Reality. True Reality's can contain false elements, like irrational beliefs in non-existant creatures as people are not 100% pure Truth-based and imperfect. This total sum of all experiances and thier unique effects of them, are that persons own totally unique reality, or True Reality.

Sometimes, an individual may be from a child, subjected to extreme victimisations, abuse, torments and other bullying and rejections. As his True Reality is built mainly on negative experiances, when he reflects his own self in an honest form onto society, he shows us the Truth. Some very persecuted torture victims become very enraged, often on a sub-consious level, and in a truth-based manner, reflect thier True-Reality onto society in a holucost of violence. They may be a mass-murderer or an arsonist. I call this a Revenge Artist. It is revenge against society and huamnity as well as an expression of self, of True Reality that is Sacred as so he is also an artist.

Why should one person have all the torment and poverty in the world and another termented victim be rich, and yet another person who is not badly victimised by his society be very wealthy? I can't see why that is fair. We are all in this world for ourselves. We are #1 to ourselves, and we are more interested in ourself than anything else in the whole world. Therefore, if a victim-creation of society has a sacred right not only to reflect his True Reality, but to also himself to do the best he can. He has the sacred right to be able to victimise others to rid himself of the torments that he himself was given, to relieve his suffering in a proper self-caring and self-respectful manner, to pass it on. He has a sacred right to try and balance out the torments and financial hardships he himself endured in the best way he can.

(If time permits, please re-read the previous definitions.)

No society has the right to order and terroristically threaten and harrass and bully an adult person to refrain from contact from another adult person. I do not conclude yet whether an adult may be prevented from seeing his own child due to abuse, this is one issue that I am yet to finalise. Even so, with a "legal guardian" breaking a restraining order to see or even abuse a child, society cannot punish the person in any way. Not even fines. He could end up in a resort-style detention-community, where he has physical freedoms and his own unit, but I am going to stop short of mentioning that here in much detail.

Lets say that a man lives with a woman. The woman is being smart with the man, and spends vast sums of his money, and refuses to pay it back. The man may be a childhood abuse torture victim, and so he decides to abuse the wife for a punishment as well as his own personal pleasure. This is a legitimate act for the man to do. The woman may try to hurt him, leave, "make it right" etc. but in no way is there any legitimate reason for society to interfere, let alone with punitive punishments and "restraining orders". In Truth, restraining orders and stalking laws have been used by police to harrass minority groups more than anything else.

The man has a sacred right to think and do whatever he wants. He has a sacred right to reflect his True Reality and abuse the woman to relieve his own torments. Do not presume, either, that the person who is "dishing it out" so to speak is always a powerful aggressor or in someway more abusive than the woman in this example. The man might be a biker, or simply an ordinary man, or a geek with glasses but it matters not, King or Peasant. He also has the right to see people he decides have a value or those he has an issue with, even if the other person does not wish to do so.

Otherwise, you get people who are extreme torture victims, like Richard Farley, being further victimsed and persecuted by society and should he take the issue up like anybody else, he can be restained from doing so and even charged with a "crime".

Further, society itself has absouletly no legitamate right to interfere at all. Would you trust a stranger who was a rapist and a murderer? Of course not. Society murders all the time : It murders animals in genocide, it murders "criminals", both in the equally lie-based, perverse "innocent"and "guilty" catagory. It murders its own soldiers in war, and badly-planned combat engagements during those wars that are deliberately designed to kill its own men to try and justify the war and increase support for it. Society kills the so-called "enemy" because it is the "wrong" color or creed. It kills unborn children in abortion. It kills its retired spy agents if they know too much, after they have killed "enemy" men on behalf of society. Society is based on lies, all of it. Its the greatest lie and most perverted nature. It is almost limitlessly bad and destructive. Do not bring in the cat to catch the mouse, the dog to catch the cat....

That leaves Me at why society chooses to do so. This brings two major issues to My mind :

1) As a tool to continue to victimise the downtrodden and to assert a devious sneaky form of power over the citizen-slaves who are in thier own private traps. This helps to target individual people, including socially-hated Truth-Reavealers whilst making it look like it is not doing so.

2) To try and pretend they care about individual people. This is to try and convince people it "cares" about us and that is why the rules are there. Nothing could be more false. Most people now have realised that speeding fines are a revenue raising scheme. Likewise, the real motive is all behind the scene. Its cloak and dagger. It get a lot of control and power over people via stalking and restraining laws. It is one of many keys to taking away freedom.

3) To try and pretend that the failed Family Unit can be salvaged via additional legislation. It's almost a joke. The family unit is fundamentally flawed, and could never be patched up. This old holden has died.

4) To hide and supress Truth. For now, I leave this point open. Why? Mainly because My hands are sore from tying. Think it over.

Undertaker, TheBareTruth.4t.com. 2004. You may copy this all whole, unmodified. No copyright. Total time spent : 3 hours.