Comments by "Spiritual Psychotherapy Services" (@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices) on "PowerfulJRE"
channel.
-
@casmatori
🐟 27. MARRIAGE & THE FAMILY:
Matrimony is the contractual union of a man with one or more women, primarily for the purpose of PROCREATION and child-rearing.
The couple should be brought together by their respective parents, and if practical, some sort of nuptial ceremony performed. Once a couple has been engaged to be married, they should not break the agreement, unless one party has been proven to have lost his or her virginity with a third party. OBVIOUSLY, after the wedding, the marriage contract cannot be broken, unless one or both parties has committed adultery, or one party has chosen to no longer carry out his or her marital duties (for instance, if the husband refuses to materially-support his wife/wives, or the wife refuses to perform domestic chores for her master, both of which are legitimate grounds for divorce).
A RESPONSIBLE father will objectively evaluate the unique characteristics, virtues, idiosyncrasies, and shortcomings of his child from a relatively early age, and thereafter, seek a compatible spouse from the available pool of persons in his social circles. Unless his nation faces extinction, the potential match should not be any closer to his child than a cousin. If a prospective couple do not belong to the same clan (and thereby do not share the same family name), it is probable that their genetic code is sufficiently divergent to create healthy offspring. As implied above, incestuous marriage should only be condoned if the human race is in danger of extermination, or possibly in the instance where an entire race or nation is on the verge of annihilation.
If one’s parents fail in their duty to select a suitable mate, one should very carefully choose a COMPATIBLE spouse. The recommended criteria used to evaluate marital compatibility are as follows: physical characteristics (such as relative height and sexual attractiveness), personality type, intelligence, emotional temperament, diet, cultural similarities, political ideology, religious affiliation, and life goals.
One of the major causes of conjugal breakdown in recent decades has been due to the couple selecting each other based solely (or at least predominantly) on sexual attraction and/or amorous attachments, with little consideration given to the other guiding principles, listed above.
Romance rarely lasts more than a couple of years. Marriage is an institution based largely on PRACTICAL considerations, not on lustful feelings or on fleeting sentimentality. Without firm, practical reasons for a couple remaining conjugally-bound, they are susceptible to marital divorce.
Generally speaking, women have the potent desire to raise children, and require a man with which to mate, and then protect and support her and the offspring, during the fifteen-plus years (for EACH child) of child-rearing. Most men also desire to have a family, and additionally, possess a very powerful libido, which, if not channelled in a legitimate fashion, can cause a great deal of social misbehaviour (e.g. rape, etc.).
There is no such thing as a nun in the eyes of God. Therefore, unless a woman is seriously disabled, either physically or psychologically, or else a lesbian, she is lawfully OBLIGATED to marry the man preselected by her parents (or if her parents are deceased, by her extant master, whether that be her grandfather, an uncle, or an adult nephew). Ideally, women ought to be betrothed as soon as they reach adulthood, to avoid a childless existence. Quite understandably, very few men have aspirations to mate with a post-menopausal female.
Marriage is mandatory for men too, apart from missionary priests, those unfortunate males who are unable to support a family for reasons of mental or physical incapacity, men who are simply passed-over by hypergamous females due to being perceived as low-value suitors, homosexuals (meaning, men who are not at all attracted to the opposite gender. Bisexuals are not exempt from marriage), and men who reside in jurisdictions where ILLEGITIMATE feministic governments enact so-called “laws” which abrogate the lawful rights of married men.
In my particular case, despite being a model husband and father, my first wife, with the support of the dirty, demonic, democratic Australian government, literally kidnapped my three precious children, whilst my second wife, with the assistance of the equally-wicked, violent, corrupt, murderous Filipino government, stole my presbytery (the house of a priest).
The recent exodus of men in Western countries from the dating pool (or at least from formal marriage) is more than understandable.
The man should be approximately ten to twenty years OLDER than his wife/wives. Some of the reasons for this are:
It is natural for women to be attracted to older men and for men to be attracted to younger women. There is a good evolutionary reason why women reach their sexual peak between the ages of about fifteen to twenty-five and why a man's sexual market value peaks in his thirties to fifties. The female matures earlier (physically and socially), so if she mates with a man of similar age, she may find her spouse to be emotionally immature. The husband is almost a substitute for the woman's father figure, so the husband’s age gives him added authority as head of the family. Also, it gives the man extra time to establish his career, a house and home for his wife and forthcoming progeny.
The main duties of the HUSBAND are to teach his wife/wives and sons whatever beneficial lessons he has learnt from his own masters, protect his family from harm, and supply their necessities of life (that is, food, clothing, and shelter) as well as desired luxuries, if practicable. The English noun “husband” comes from the Old Norse word “hûsbôndi”, meaning “master of the house”.
Marriage is not a democracy. Any so-called man who compromises with his subordinates, whether they be his wife/wives or his offspring, is surely doomed to failure. Feminized western men, in particular, are guilty of such uxoriousness. Such emasculated “men” are not true men, and desperately need to regain their dignity as the head of their homes.
The main daily duties of the WIFE are to execute domestic chores such as to cook, clean, sew, take care of the children, and to keep the husband sexually satisfied so he doesn't look at other women.
The wife should submit to the will of her husband. She should fully respect him as her master, and should address him accordingly.
Whilst conversing, the wife should focus her attention completely on her husband. She should listen carefully to what he says, learn what he is saying, answer him, and obey his instructions. A man should never be alone with any female, apart from his wife, of course.
POLYGAMY has been taught by all the major religions. Unfortunately, the “westernized” religious cults seem to have done away with the practice for unbeknown reasons. The reason for polygamy is simply due to the fact that every woman needs a husband. Also, a certain proportion of men are destined to die as bachelors due to female hypergamy, which is a natural trait of women (even if it may seem unfair).
When a woman marries, she LITERALLY joins the family of her husband.
She takes her master's family name, and the husband's parents become her parents, which is why they are called “father/mother-in-law”, that is, “father/mother according to the law” (the one and only law of God, or more accurately, the Universal Law, as propounded in Chapter 12).
Cont...
1
-
THE ETHICS OF ABORTION:
Even though (illegitimate) abortion is merely one of a long list of crimes, it is such a controversial issue that it is being given its own subsection.
Although some pro-life advocates use the term “abortion” solely in those cases in which the aim and purpose of the procedure is to terminate the life of the unborn child (as opposed to those cases in which the aim is to save the life of the mother, and the death of the embryo is an undesired consequence of the procedure), this author sees no semantic advantage of making such a distinction, and so, in this document, the term “abortion” is applied to any medical procedure in which the life of an embryo or a foetus is DELIBERATELY terminated, for any reason.
Of course, just as there is a definite distinction between justified (i.e. legitimate) animal consumption and unjustified (i.e. illegitimate) animal consumption, so too is there a distinction between legitimate abortion and illegitimate abortion. Thus, the terminology has been established.
Regarding ABORTION, it is pertinent to make mention of a particularly controversial issue, and that is, whether or not an unborn human (whether zygote, embryo, or foetus) is fully human. The undeniable and blatantly obvious fact is, that a child conceived by two parents of the Homo sapiens species (or even cloned from a single parent) is without a doubt, a unique human being from the very moment of conception. Those in favour of illegal abortion (i.e. killing of an unborn child for unlawful, illicit reasons) are quite adamant that it is perfectly fine to end the life of an unborn child (sometimes even a birthed child, believe it or not!) due to it being underdeveloped, insentient, and/or unconscious.
Because there are some pro-abortion (that is, pro-unjustifiable-abortion) advocates who make desperate attempts to find flaws in the pro-life position, here, “conception” refers to the very moment that a spermatozoon nucleus fuses with an ovum nucleus, and syngamy takes place. However, it is important to understand that the question of the precise millisecond when a unique human life begins is completely redundant, because nobody is likely to surgically operate on a woman shortly after sexual intercourse has taken place, in order to prevent a fertilized egg from achieving syngamy! As mentioned in Chapter 28, whenever any one of the procreative, recreative, or unitive aspects of sex is omitted, sex becomes a selfish, sinful act, and so, to prevent a newly-fertilized ovum from its natural course of events, would count as a criminal act.
Any human with adequate intelligence knows that even after an infant child has been birthed, it is still not fully developed, since it has yet to pass through the preliminary phases of life such as childhood and adolescence. So then, why stop killing at the foetal stage? Why not destroy the life of a twelve-year-old boy, since he has not yet fully developed unto adulthood? The fact remains that a human is fully human, regardless of the phase of life in which it is situated. It is not partially human and partially giraffe – it is fully human. The aforementioned prenatal stages (zygote, embryo, and foetus) are just that – merely stages of the human life cycle, and although, according to normative mores, the life of an embryo may not be quite as morally valuable as that of a five-year-old child, that is insufficient justification alone for extinguishing its very life! Therefore, it is debatable whether or not a human zygote or an embryo is, by the strictest definitions of the terms, a conscious person, but it is INDISPUTABLE that it is a human being, worthy of protection, and must not be unlawfully terminated in a just society. Before contemplating the brutal destruction of an innocent human being, one should have an exceedingly-justifiable rationale. Demonic humans (see Chapter 14) are constantly inventing multifarious excuses for murdering poor, innocent, defenceless children, purely in order to rationalize their wicked agenda, but there are only two scenarios in which abortion may be lawful. It is indeed fortuitous that the mothers of outstanding historic personalities such as Lords Krishna, Gautama, and Jesus decided to not murder their precious offspring!
In brief, abortion is justified only in the case of rape or if the mother’s life is endangered. Obviously, that does not imply that the life of the baby of a raped woman MUST be terminated. As mentioned in the next paragraph (in relation to my own course of action in the hypothetical case of the rape of a female family member), I would do everything in my power to convince a raped family member to lovingly nurture the child unto birth, and then relinquish the child to an adoptive family. Therefore, when all is said and done, the need for any kind of (legitimate) abortion would be such a tiny fraction of one percent of all pregnancies that it would be more simply expressed as a negative exponent. Only if the expectant mother is acutely distressed by carrying the child of her rapist, should abortion be considered, and it would be preferable for the raped woman to do so as soon as practical. It would be a truly savage, barbaric act for her to kill her child in the third trimester of pregnancy!
Personally, I don’t think that I could ever condone the abortion of a child, by a woman in my family, even if she was the victim of rape, because I could NEVER perform the act of inserting my arm into the uterus of my mother, one of my wives or daughters, and manually extracting the embryo or foetus. And if I could not bring myself to perform such a despicable deed myself, I ought not pay a (so-called) doctor to execute the baby on my behalf. Sometimes, I feel faintly guilty destroying the life of an insect, such as a mosquito or an ant, even when it is attacking me or my food supply, what to speak of terminating the life of a fellow human being, the most highly-evolved species of life in the known universe!
As noted in the glossary of this book, it could be seen as hypocritical, or at least somewhat disingenuous, for a person to kill a non-human animal unless that person is willing to do so with his or her bare hands. I could never squeeze a rat to death using just my bare hands, so I ought not dismember a member of my own species, no matter how small it may be, without proper justification, according to moral norms.
Perhaps the most common justification for illegitimate abortion (that is, the murder of innocent, defenceless, unborn human beings) is that a woman ought to have AUTONOMY over her own body. Of course, those who raise such arguments conveniently overlook the fact that the pre-born human, by the same token, is entitled to the very same bodily autonomy as its mother! Those who are afflicted with a demonic mentality (which, after reading Chapter 14, as well as many other chapters of this treatise, one should come to understand to be practically every person on the planet), especially those persons residing in nations/countries with a predominantly leftist (“adharma”, in Sanskrit) populace will never come to accept the fact that no human being who has ever lived is his or her own master/mistress, and therefore, has no such “right” as autonomy over his or her own body. Does a newborn child have autonomy over him/herself? Obviously not, otherwise no parent would dare to regulate the activities of their offspring. Does a mother have autonomy over herself? Definitely not, since her lord and master (the word “husband” literally denotes the master of a house – see Chapter 27) has absolute authority to direct and control her actions and movements. Again, this bitter truth, will never ever be accepted by the vast majority of the population, but the truth must be proclaimed, nevertheless.
Incidentally, the very same paradigm outlined above, applies also to societal organization, in which a father has full authority over his family, a grandfather has full authority over his extended family, a patriarch has full authority over his clan, a chief has full authority over his tribe, a (genuine) king has complete and utter authority over his subjects, and finally, a (genuine) priest has authority over his entire society. The only humans who can possibly claim to have complete AUTONOMY over themselves are those excruciatingly-rare men who have risen to the role of World Teacher (“Avatāra”, in Sanskrit), and only then, solely upon their actual entry to the Holy Priesthood. As children, Avatars are subject to the authority of their mothers, then, upon adulthood, to the authority of their fathers, and if they happen to perform some kind of work prior to entering the Priesthood (as with Lord Jesus Christ, who worked as a carpenter before He began His priestly ministry), to their employers.
Possibly the saddest aspect of the abortion debate is the fact that the sex that has evolved to MOST nourish and protect vulnerable human offspring, is more in favour of illegitimate abortion. Personally, I am very thankful that my mother was not a miserable, rabid feminist who would have considered murdering the next World Teacher for any trivial reason whatever. Apart from the legitimacy of abortion in the very rare instances of rape or danger to the life of the mother, not a single one of their frivolous reasons is reasonable to a person of civility and intelligence. There will always be at least one decent family that will gladly take an unwanted newborn baby from a murderous parent.
N.B. It is rather important to refer to the Glossary definitions of some of the terms used in this subsection.
1
-
@SB-mr2nk
🐟 27. MARRIAGE & THE FAMILY:
Matrimony is the contractual union of a man with one or more women, primarily for the purpose of PROCREATION and child-rearing.
The couple should be brought together by their respective parents, and if practical, some sort of nuptial ceremony performed. Once a couple has been engaged to be married, they should not break the agreement, unless one party has been proven to have lost his or her virginity with a third party. OBVIOUSLY, after the wedding, the marriage contract cannot be broken, unless one or both parties has committed adultery, or one party has chosen to no longer carry out his or her marital duties (for instance, if the husband refuses to materially-support his wife/wives, or the wife refuses to perform domestic chores for her master, both of which are legitimate grounds for divorce).
A RESPONSIBLE father will objectively evaluate the unique characteristics, virtues, idiosyncrasies, and shortcomings of his child from a relatively early age, and thereafter, seek a compatible spouse from the available pool of persons in his social circles. Unless his nation faces extinction, the potential match should not be any closer to his child than a cousin. If a prospective couple do not belong to the same clan (and thereby do not share the same family name), it is probable that their genetic code is sufficiently divergent to create healthy offspring. As implied above, incestuous marriage should only be condoned if the human race is in danger of extermination, or possibly in the instance where an entire race or nation is on the verge of annihilation.
If one’s parents fail in their duty to select a suitable mate, one should very carefully choose a COMPATIBLE spouse. The recommended criteria used to evaluate marital compatibility are as follows: physical characteristics (such as relative height and sexual attractiveness), personality type, intelligence, emotional temperament, diet, cultural similarities, political ideology, religious affiliation, and life goals.
One of the major causes of conjugal breakdown in recent decades has been due to the couple selecting each other based solely (or at least predominantly) on sexual attraction and/or amorous attachments, with little consideration given to the other guiding principles, listed above.
Romance rarely lasts more than a couple of years. Marriage is an institution based largely on PRACTICAL considerations, not on lustful feelings or on fleeting sentimentality. Without firm, practical reasons for a couple remaining conjugally-bound, they are susceptible to marital divorce.
Generally speaking, women have the potent desire to raise children, and require a man with which to mate, and then protect and support her and the offspring, during the fifteen-plus years (for EACH child) of child-rearing. Most men also desire to have a family, and additionally, possess a very powerful libido, which, if not channelled in a legitimate fashion, can cause a great deal of social misbehaviour (e.g. rape, etc.).
There is no such thing as a nun in the eyes of God. Therefore, unless a woman is seriously disabled, either physically or psychologically, or else a lesbian, she is lawfully OBLIGATED to marry the man preselected by her parents (or if her parents are deceased, by her extant master, whether that be her grandfather, an uncle, or an adult nephew). Ideally, women ought to be betrothed as soon as they reach adulthood, to avoid a childless existence. Quite understandably, very few men have aspirations to mate with a post-menopausal female.
Marriage is mandatory for men too, apart from missionary priests, those unfortunate males who are unable to support a family for reasons of mental or physical incapacity, men who are simply passed-over by hypergamous females due to being perceived as low-value suitors, homosexuals (meaning, men who are not at all attracted to the opposite gender. Bisexuals are not exempt from marriage), and men who reside in jurisdictions where ILLEGITIMATE feministic governments enact so-called “laws” which abrogate the lawful rights of married men.
In my particular case, despite being a model husband and father, my first wife, with the support of the dirty, demonic, democratic Australian government, literally kidnapped my three precious children, whilst my second wife, with the assistance of the equally-wicked, violent, corrupt, murderous Filipino government, stole my presbytery (the house of a priest).
The recent exodus of men in Western countries from the dating pool (or at least from formal marriage) is more than understandable.
The man should be approximately ten to twenty years OLDER than his wife/wives. Some of the reasons for this are:
It is natural for women to be attracted to older men and for men to be attracted to younger women. There is a good evolutionary reason why women reach their sexual peak between the ages of about fifteen to twenty-five and why a man's sexual market value peaks in his thirties to fifties. The female matures earlier (physically and socially), so if she mates with a man of similar age, she may find her spouse to be emotionally immature. The husband is almost a substitute for the woman's father figure, so the husband’s age gives him added authority as head of the family. Also, it gives the man extra time to establish his career, a house and home for his wife and forthcoming progeny.
The main duties of the HUSBAND are to teach his wife/wives and sons whatever beneficial lessons he has learnt from his own masters, protect his family from harm, and supply their necessities of life (that is, food, clothing, and shelter) as well as desired luxuries, if practicable. The English noun “husband” comes from the Old Norse word “hûsbôndi”, meaning “master of the house”.
Marriage is not a democracy. Any so-called man who compromises with his subordinates, whether they be his wife/wives or his offspring, is surely doomed to failure. Feminized western men, in particular, are guilty of such uxoriousness. Such emasculated “men” are not true men, and desperately need to regain their dignity as the head of their homes.
The main daily duties of the WIFE are to execute domestic chores such as to cook, clean, sew, take care of the children, and to keep the husband sexually satisfied so he doesn't look at other women.
The wife should submit to the will of her husband. She should fully respect him as her master, and should address him accordingly.
Whilst conversing, the wife should focus her attention completely on her husband. She should listen carefully to what he says, learn what he is saying, answer him, and obey his instructions. A man should never be alone with any female, apart from his wife, of course.
POLYGAMY has been taught by all the major religions. Unfortunately, the “westernized” religious cults seem to have done away with the practice for unbeknown reasons. The reason for polygamy is simply due to the fact that every woman needs a husband. Also, a certain proportion of men are destined to die as bachelors due to female hypergamy, which is a natural trait of women (even if it may seem unfair).
When a woman marries, she LITERALLY joins the family of her husband.
She takes her master's family name, and the husband's parents become her parents, which is why they are called “father/mother-in-law”, that is, “father/mother according to the law” (the one and only law of God, or more accurately, the Universal Law, as propounded in Chapter 12).
Cont...
1
-
@gipsybauski8971
🐟 27. MARRIAGE & THE FAMILY:
Matrimony is the contractual union of a man with one or more women, primarily for the purpose of PROCREATION and child-rearing.
The couple should be brought together by their respective parents, and if practical, some sort of nuptial ceremony performed. Once a couple has been engaged to be married, they should not break the agreement, unless one party has been proven to have lost his or her virginity with a third party. OBVIOUSLY, after the wedding, the marriage contract cannot be broken, unless one or both parties has committed adultery, or one party has chosen to no longer carry out his or her marital duties (for instance, if the husband refuses to materially-support his wife/wives, or the wife refuses to perform domestic chores for her master, both of which are legitimate grounds for divorce).
A RESPONSIBLE father will objectively evaluate the unique characteristics, virtues, idiosyncrasies, and shortcomings of his child from a relatively early age, and thereafter, seek a compatible spouse from the available pool of persons in his social circles. Unless his nation faces extinction, the potential match should not be any closer to his child than a cousin. If a prospective couple do not belong to the same clan (and thereby do not share the same family name), it is probable that their genetic code is sufficiently divergent to create healthy offspring. As implied above, incestuous marriage should only be condoned if the human race is in danger of extermination, or possibly in the instance where an entire race or nation is on the verge of annihilation.
If one’s parents fail in their duty to select a suitable mate, one should very carefully choose a COMPATIBLE spouse. The recommended criteria used to evaluate marital compatibility are as follows: physical characteristics (such as relative height and sexual attractiveness), personality type, intelligence, emotional temperament, diet, cultural similarities, political ideology, religious affiliation, and life goals.
One of the major causes of conjugal breakdown in recent decades has been due to the couple selecting each other based solely (or at least predominantly) on sexual attraction and/or amorous attachments, with little consideration given to the other guiding principles, listed above.
Romance rarely lasts more than a couple of years. Marriage is an institution based largely on PRACTICAL considerations, not on lustful feelings or on fleeting sentimentality. Without firm, practical reasons for a couple remaining conjugally-bound, they are susceptible to marital divorce.
Generally speaking, women have the potent desire to raise children, and require a man with which to mate, and then protect and support her and the offspring, during the fifteen-plus years (for EACH child) of child-rearing. Most men also desire to have a family, and additionally, possess a very powerful libido, which, if not channelled in a legitimate fashion, can cause a great deal of social misbehaviour (e.g. rape, etc.).
There is no such thing as a nun in the eyes of God. Therefore, unless a woman is seriously disabled, either physically or psychologically, or else a lesbian, she is lawfully OBLIGATED to marry the man preselected by her parents (or if her parents are deceased, by her extant master, whether that be her grandfather, an uncle, or an adult nephew). Ideally, women ought to be betrothed as soon as they reach adulthood, to avoid a childless existence. Quite understandably, very few men have aspirations to mate with a post-menopausal female.
Marriage is mandatory for men too, apart from missionary priests, those unfortunate males who are unable to support a family for reasons of mental or physical incapacity, men who are simply passed-over by hypergamous females due to being perceived as low-value suitors, homosexuals (meaning, men who are not at all attracted to the opposite gender. Bisexuals are not exempt from marriage), and men who reside in jurisdictions where ILLEGITIMATE feministic governments enact so-called “laws” which abrogate the lawful rights of married men.
In my particular case, despite being a model husband and father, my first wife, with the support of the dirty, demonic, democratic Australian government, literally kidnapped my three precious children, whilst my second wife, with the assistance of the equally-wicked, violent, corrupt, murderous Filipino government, stole my presbytery (the house of a priest).
The recent exodus of men in Western countries from the dating pool (or at least from formal marriage) is more than understandable.
The man should be approximately ten to twenty years OLDER than his wife/wives. Some of the reasons for this are:
It is natural for women to be attracted to older men and for men to be attracted to younger women. There is a good evolutionary reason why women reach their sexual peak between the ages of about fifteen to twenty-five and why a man's sexual market value peaks in his thirties to fifties. The female matures earlier (physically and socially), so if she mates with a man of similar age, she may find her spouse to be emotionally immature. The husband is almost a substitute for the woman's father figure, so the husband’s age gives him added authority as head of the family. Also, it gives the man extra time to establish his career, a house and home for his wife and forthcoming progeny.
The main duties of the HUSBAND are to teach his wife/wives and sons whatever beneficial lessons he has learnt from his own masters, protect his family from harm, and supply their necessities of life (that is, food, clothing, and shelter) as well as desired luxuries, if practicable. The English noun “husband” comes from the Old Norse word “hûsbôndi”, meaning “master of the house”.
Marriage is not a democracy. Any so-called man who compromises with his subordinates, whether they be his wife/wives or his offspring, is surely doomed to failure. Feminized western men, in particular, are guilty of such uxoriousness. Such emasculated “men” are not true men, and desperately need to regain their dignity as the head of their homes.
The main daily duties of the WIFE are to execute domestic chores such as to cook, clean, sew, take care of the children, and to keep the husband sexually satisfied so he doesn't look at other women.
The wife should submit to the will of her husband. She should fully respect him as her master, and should address him accordingly.
Whilst conversing, the wife should focus her attention completely on her husband. She should listen carefully to what he says, learn what he is saying, answer him, and obey his instructions. A man should never be alone with any female, apart from his wife, of course.
POLYGAMY has been taught by all the major religions. Unfortunately, the “westernized” religious cults seem to have done away with the practice for unbeknown reasons. The reason for polygamy is simply due to the fact that every woman needs a husband. Also, a certain proportion of men are destined to die as bachelors due to female hypergamy, which is a natural trait of women (even if it may seem unfair).
When a woman marries, she LITERALLY joins the family of her husband.
She takes her master's family name, and the husband's parents become her parents, which is why they are called “father/mother-in-law”, that is, “father/mother according to the law” (the one and only law of God, or more accurately, the Universal Law, as propounded in Chapter 12).
Cont...
1