In these transactions where this code is used to govern those particular transactions, there are inalienable and unalienable rights and TERMS are defined, but does it means those SAME definitions traverse outside the realm of the transaction so governed?
Would this be true in everyday spoken tongue? Because according to standard dictionary, The unalienable rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence could just as well have been inalienable, which means the same thing. Inalienable or unalienable refers to that which cannot be given away or taken away.
I think we have become so conditioned to get caught up in semantics, our ability to communicate has been compromised because now it seems people have to define each and every term, each and every time, each and every one of us speaks and it is just getting damn tedious.
This is what I call the "lawyer effect" from too many years of people talking SOLELY about the law, but not talking about the PHILOSOPHY behind the law as living souls; we are beginning to act, walk, and talk like lawyers, and as a result, appear to think that those terms DEFINE our world.
We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.
If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.