DWQA Questions › Tag: human sovereignty
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
A practitioner also asks: “Why are some governments so bent on vaccine mandates? Do the vaccine mandates and passports have any benefit whatsoever in ending the pandemic? What’s the true intention behind the vaccine passport and what’s the endgame with it?”
ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • 
291 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner also asks: “What is the divine perspective on “the pandemic of the unvaccinated” statement, which divided the world into two camps based on vaccination status? Was this a scientifically sound statement, or was it part of the propaganda campaign driven by the interlopers to divide and weaken humanity?”
ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • 
266 views0 answers0 votes
A viewer asks: “Please ask Creator if there was foul play in the death of a vocal opponent of vaccination. She allegedly died of COVID.”
ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • 
267 views0 answers0 votes
Alexis de Tocqueville was a French aristocrat, diplomat, political scientist, and historian, known for his work Democracy in America written after his travels in the United States in the early 1800s. Wikipedia says of Tocqueville: “Tocqueville was a classical liberal who advocated parliamentary government and was skeptical of the extremes of democracy.” With the current unrest and deep polarization in the United States, American democracy is facing its severest test since the Civil War. Can Creator share the divine perspective on Tocqueville, his work, and the extent to which it embodies divine truth and is a product of divine inspiration?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
330 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” What is the divine perspective of this statement?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
315 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith.” What is the divine perspective of this statement?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
332 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “What good does it do me, after all, if an ever-watchful authority keeps an eye out to ensure that my pleasures will be tranquil and races ahead of me to ward off all danger, sparing me the need even to think about such things, if that authority, even as it removes the smallest thorns from my path, is also absolute master of my liberty and my life; if it monopolizes vitality and existence to such a degree that when it languishes, everything around it must also languish; when it sleeps, everything must also sleep; and when it dies, everything must also perish?” This sounds a bit like life in the rest of the universe outside of the Milky Way Galaxy. Was Tocqueville discerning the motive for the divine free will experiment?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
313 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “I cannot help fearing that men may reach a point where they look on every new theory as a danger, every innovation as a toilsome trouble, every social advance as a first step toward revolution, and that they may absolutely refuse to move at all.” Tocqueville seems to be seeing the dangers of complacency almost 200 years ago. What is the divine perspective on this statement?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
300 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “It’s not an endlessly expanding list of rights—the right to education, the right to health care, the right to food and housing. That’s not freedom, that’s dependency. Those aren’t rights, those are the rations of slavery—hay and a barn for human cattle.” This comment on the expanding list of rights sounds like a lot of today’s political talking points. Can Creator comment?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
316 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “Men will not accept truth at the hands of their enemies, and truth is seldom offered to them by their friends.” This statement seems to be both an observation on reality, as well as advice on spreading truth. What is Creator’s perspective on this statement?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
299 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “A man’s admiration for absolute government is proportionate to the contempt he feels for those around him.” What is the divine perspective of that statement?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
305 views0 answers0 votes
Tocqueville said: “He who does anything because it is the custom, makes no choice. He gains no practice either in discerning or in desiring what is best. The mental and moral, like the muscular powers, are improved only by being used. The faculties are called into no exercise by doing a thing merely because others do it, no more than by believing a thing only because others believe it.” This seems to be Tocqueville advocating the intentional and focused pursuit of personal wisdom. What is the divine perspective on this statement?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
289 views0 answers0 votes
Democracy is only as noble as the voters. Can Creator share how prayer work and the Lightworker Healing Protocol can heal and elevate the majority to aspire to and vote for solutions that more succinctly benefit “all” rather than simply the majority?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
334 views0 answers0 votes
The Magna Carta is now over 800 years old. It arose as a negotiated deal between the King of England and barons he was in conflict with. The barons were interested only in their own rights, not the rights of common people. Nevertheless, the foundational principle that “No one is above the law, even the king” was established. From this simple beginning, English common law arose that is foundational to the rule of law, and not rule by decree. What is the divine perspective on this event, was it divinely inspired, and why is it an outcome of violent conflict, rather than simple insight and reflection?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
278 views0 answers0 votes
Following the Magna Carta, the king countered against the loss of power to the barons by removing the ability to trespass against the peasantry or the common person. This seeming act of tit-for-tat retribution essentially ended the slavery of the peasant and the practice of serfdom in England. It appears this was an unintended consequence of an impasse and conflict between two orbits of political power—the monarch and the aristocracy. To what extent did divine intervention make this dramatic turn of events for the common person possible?
ClosedNicola asked 4 years ago • 
270 views0 answers0 votes
« Previous12345Next »