Your first step should be to READ THE ACT. The acts made to CHANGE names, grants rights to your CURRENT name (You didn't make it, someone else did.) and allows you to CHANGE it.

If you waive the benefit of the ACT, the name is "abandoned" but has a claim... except the government is not a PERSON. They have NO authority to claim. They can only have custody. Custody - Custodian. Simple huh? :D

Thank you for your input.

custodian means trustee? assuming its this... http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c07_e.htm i am missing a connection as to where the benefit is waived. Benefit is the recognition of that person?

Well it doesn't mean OWNER :P

backing up to his original question part and modifying it. [I]s it possible that we in america can use your canadian authored document without altering the cite to the canadian law (act) to the U.S. act? would that aspect be a point of valid argument against it for 'them', or is it possible that we (in america) can cite a simple statement that says they are obligated to honor neighboring state law?

No, the ACTS used to change names have the joinder. It doesn't matter where you are. Simply investigate the acts governing the legal g=changing of a name.

ok then so would I simply remove your reference to the canadian act within the document and use it as it is? (i know not to change anything within your documents). as i see it if i used it with, they would argue 'canada law' is not applicable! we are getting the jist of this. citing any act itself creates a presumption of joinder? doesnt matter where it is, canada, america, etc...

I would quote the Constitution contract law issue that we have a right to not make contract it's in our Constitution for god sake

anyone only has one right and that right is to not contract.

the United States deals with articles Canada deals with acts

Dont bang on about the Constitution because you will be fucked up by them kunts for even mentioning it. Its a fucking TRAP !!

the only thing that is mentioned there is the fact that you have the right to not contract from the Constitution. In America

at the time of your birth name was created in all capitals

you do not own this name the government does

the name that I go by is not the same name

the notice of mistake clearly separate these two names

remember what the notice of mistake it say it is removing consent

ending an old contract that you did not know was in place

They're PSEUDONYMS. LEGAL FICTIONS. GO & GET FUCKED KUNTS HOW IN FUCKERYS NAME CAN YE HAVE A LEGAL FICTION ?? I N S A N I T Y A L E R T !!

Yes, Who-are You Frisbey, i get that it separates. Quoting a Canadian law if you are in the U.S. doesnt seem to make much sense. It would be no different than quoting a law that says stealing will get your hands cut off and trying to enforce it here. Siting the correct, applicable laws would seem relevant.

yes switch out Canadian name change ac an add an American name change act

the benefit is in the name change conjoining act of the United States

by waving this benefit you

void the consent given to it

you must remove all 12 keys pre sumptions individually

the only reason you mention an act is to tell them that you don't want its benefit.

Damn, can you point me to those 12 key presumptions mentioned in athread? I must have missed that part or i didn't sink in.

you are not part of the club and you don't want to be part of the club thanks but no thanks

hey back when I was born that name you gave me and made of them and u joint with my name hey that was a mistake and I'm sorry but uh I don't agree to that

its in the files tab on the beginning of tender for law

let the notice of mistakes speak for itself

Thank you Who-are You Frisbey. I did read this early on and did not absorb it. I appreciate your pointing it out again. I must go read all this again.

read everything a hundred times

you have to also look up every word don't think you know what a word means look it up the blacks Law Dictionary

I have to do this because I'm Dyslexic

Scott Duncan: If you waive the benefit of the ACT, the name is "abandoned" but has a claim... except the government is not a PERSON. They have NO authority to claim. They can only have custody. Custody - Custodian. Simple huh?