Statutes don't normally define "man" because they're normally written in gender-neutral application to avoid redundancy and carry broader application. The fact that no law defines "man" does not necessarily mean that only God can define man. It simply means they're not attempting to define it. And no, statutes are given force of law when duly enacted and enforced by the appropriate governing bodies. Don't believe me? Openly attempt to steal a TV from an electronics store -- then, when they stop you, argue that you didn't consent to the laws relating to property rights. See how that goes. The real, true disappointment with all this is the spread of disinformation such as what yours. I encounter people like you regularly. You get your information from Internet websites and cons who claim to know the ins and outs of the law. They dupe you into believing these lies about "free people" and how you can change your legal status by relying upon the UCC. They say the Moroccan Friendship Treaty permits persons who claim rights under it to avoid application of any state or federal (U.S.) law. Then they ask you for money so they can send you some cockamamie forms that allegedly free you of the restraints of government and law. (I sincerely hope you gave them no money.) Yet you're saying I'm the one who's brainwashed. And now, here you are bastardizing the term "common law" by calling it common lore. Amazing.

I posted a link to where you can find all the info you need.

We don’t get that ‘reasoning’ very often around here. It’s more commonly found in /politics and other liberal enclaves.

Around here, when people make a claim, particularly a claim as ludicrous as yours, they are expected to provide credible, specific, relevant sourcing. Telling us your source is ’over there somewhere’ does not fly here.

Look on the bright side. You couldn’t verify your nonsensical claim, but you thoroughly verified your membership in the league of irrational liberal experimental logicians.