|
||||||
 |
Recent Posts | Search by username | |
Contact Us | |
Login | |
Register |
 |
 |
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
24HourForums.com > The Top 10 Supported Forums > 24's Political Matters > Is the Constitution a "living document" |
| Moderated by: 24HourNut | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
UsedToRide Original500© Member  ^^^That is LOVE!!^^^
|
  |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Now that this thread has turned into a discussion about God, let me ask this.... Is it possible to believe in God, have your faith, and NOT believe God had anything to do with the Declaration of Independence in your (whichever "your" you are) opinion?
 Respect some, trust one, fear none ~~Bullet A hundred criminals may be set free, but one innocent man should not go to prison, for that will make the entire system criminal ~Chief Justice T.L.Venkatraman |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
muddawber Guardian1000© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
UsedToRide wrote: Now that this thread has turned into a discussion about God, let me ask this.... I believe in God, and have faith, but I don't believe God had anything to do with the Declaration Of Independence.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
UsedToRide wrote: Now that this thread has turned into a discussion about God, let me ask this.... I hope this doesn't become a discussion about God. Whether God exists or not has nothing to do with where rights come from. God could still exist and not be the source of rights.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator  aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why don't we take a look at what the chief architect of the Constitution, John Adams, had to say about it In his, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" [1787-1788] while the Constitution was entering the business of getting Ratified. I am sure his opinion is more "in the know" than any of us here. "The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. Although the detail of the formation of the American governments is at present little known or regarded either in Europe or in America, it may hereafter become an object of curiosity. It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses." ". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind." Sidenote: The Founding Fathers, also, rarely practiced Christian orthodoxy. Although they supported the free exercise of any religion, they understood the dangers of religion. Most of them believed in deism and attended Freemasonry lodges. According to John J. Robinson, "Freemasonry had been a powerful force for religious freedom." Freemasons took seriously the principle that men should worship according to their own conscious. Masonry welcomed anyone from any religion or non-religion. My point: I believe the People were always intended to be in charge and that is what the Constitution is about. If we want to change it, we can. But it requires that we do so while vigilantly guarding our rights while doing so. In that sense, it is a living entity - not frozen, dead, and locked to stay unchanged. The Adam quote and freemasonry reminder serve as an illustration that THE PEOPLE ARE THE AUTHORIZING AUTHORITY. THEY HAVE TO GIVE THEIR CONSENT AND THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CHANGES TO THE CONSTITUTION regardless of where some people may or may not have been inspired, or what invisible entity they may or may not believe in.
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UsedToRide Original500© Member ^^^That is LOVE!!^^^
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This is what counts right here. Brians statement (and Mud's) are what I think, and agree with. Just like you can support the troops and not support Bush, you can have your faith, believe in God, and not believe that God had anything to do with our Constitution, or the Declaration of Independence. What Frank added, from John Adams, is clearly indicative of the answers to the questions being asked here. But what John Adams himself said won't matter to some. They will twist and skew it to suit their own argument. The truth be damned....I want it to read <insert some other view/opinion/idea/wish here> and that's what it reads for me. I have my opinion, don't confuse me with the facts. Sometimes I wonder why you guys argue things with some of the posters here. You're not going to teach them anything, or get them to admit they are wrong.
Respect some, trust one, fear none ~~Bullet A hundred criminals may be set free, but one innocent man should not go to prison, for that will make the entire system criminal ~Chief Justice T.L.Venkatraman |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
UsedToRide wrote:Sometimes I wonder why you guys argue things with some of the posters here. You're not going to teach them anything, or get them to admit they are wrong. Criss, so that we don't take this thread off topic, I made your comment a separate standalone topic in Open Talk.
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
UsedToRide wrote:
I think this is an important point: There seems to be something of an argument from authority going on as it applies to the Constitution. i.e., "The Founding Fathers believed in God. Therefore, since they were intelligent men, God must permeate our government." I just don't buy that. The Founding Fathers were steeped in European history, and European history itself was steeped in the blood of religious wars. In fact, one of the reasons the Puritans got on the boat in the first place was to escape religious persecution. It seems highly unlikely to me that they would try and set up a sectarian state, when they had so many good examples of just how much such a state sucked.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
muddawber Guardian1000© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian wrote: UsedToRide wrote: Brian, when the Puritans left England because they couldn't change the Church from within, they went to Holland. In Holland, they had no rights, could not own property,and could hardly work. They got a charter to come to the New Land, and their idea was to create and be the new Jerusalem. They felt God was allowing then to come here to do His work. When they set up their village, it was tightly controled by their religious beliefs. If someone stepped outside these beliefs, they were shunned by the rest, until they repented. The puritans were very strict in their religion. If everything went well for them, they gave God the credit. If things were going bad, they felt they had done something that angered God, and set about to make things right again. I'll try to get you the title of the book this came from. Sorry if I went off topic again.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member 
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24hournut We've played the "pull the quote out of a hat game" in the past. I can post quotes after quote by the Founders that support the concept that our government and laws are based on Biblical principles. Brian "The Constitution lays down the fundamental principles of our laws and government." Wrong again. The DOI lays down the fundamenta principles on which are laws and government are based. The Constitution provides the "instructions" for how those fundamental rights and freedoms are to be honored and protected by the government. "The Declaration of Independence did one thing and one thing only: It declared our independence." You make that statement, which is wrong, and then contradict the statment. Any cursory reading of the DOI makes that clear. The DOI not only declared independence it declared the reasons why independence from England was justified. UTR "Is it possible to believe in God, have your faith, and NOT believe God had anything to do with the Declaration of Independence in your (whichever "your" you are) opinion?" You could believe that but it wouldn't be historically accurate as far as the Founders were concerned. They believed God was involved.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: 24hournut Showing what the chief architect of the Constitution has to say in his formal Defense of the Constitution during Ratification isn't just "pulling a quote out of the hat." It's called "direct and pertinent." I know it sucks when I pull out something very direct and pertinent by a key Founder, but that speaks more to your hopes and desires than the quality of the evidence. It also speaks to your lack of ability to provide specific and direct evidence to back up your claims. If you have something to show that Adams was coerced or drunk or something when he wrote that, go ahead and show it. Otherwise, dodging truth with a cheap attempt to disqualify something just because it was shown to you here in a post is ridiculous. If you have a problem with Adams' views your problem is with Adams, not me posting a part of his formal Defense. Have something direct and relevant to show Adam's position is not what it appears to be from his work? Of course you don't. However you are still invited to show us something by the chief architect of the Constitution that contradicts his own Defense of the Constitution if you want. I'll be waiting over here -----> 
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Brian Grand Poobah of Moderation
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
muddawber wrote: Brian wrote:UsedToRide wrote: Hi, Mudd. I don't think you're off-topic at all. I think America's underpinnings are very important to understanding the Constitution. The Puritans were persecuted in England for their religion, as were the Pilgrims before them. Yes, they had their religious beliefs, and they practiced them in the colonies. But the idea of religious tolerance went with them. In fact, Roger Williams in 1636 specifically set up Rhode Island as a colony with religious tolerance as a result of getting banished from Plymouth colony. Hell, even in Great Britain, there was religious toleration by 1689 (for Protestants, at least). That was > 100 years before the Constitution.
"It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last." -- "A Long December", Counting Crows |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24hournut You can pull a quote here and there out of a hat by Madison, Adams, Jefferson, etc. But none of those quotes change the wording of the DOI and the fundamental principles expressed in that document. Our freedoms and rights come from God not from government. Governments are established to protect those rights and freedoms.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: 24hournut Why would Adams' Defense of the Constitution be "out of a hat?" Do you not find that work to be evidence of his position?
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
24HourNut Administrator aka Frank
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pmh1nic wrote: 24hournut We've been over this. The wording in the DOI is quite revolutionary and interesting. Despite what many believe or interpret, it purposefully, and in a highly unusual way for its day, amazingly generic. It is more Deist or Freemason in style. Aks George Washington, our first hero and President, about his freemasonry apron and membership. Regardless, the DOI is a public statement about Independence. The Constution is the actual system the Founders believed people should live by. That is why there is no mention of God or Christianity, despite what people hope, believe, or interpret. That is why they were revolutionary in separating out the religious baloney and to ensure it, included an unprecedented No Religious Test function. So the fundamental concept in the DOI which is that there is some sort of Nature's God at play is important of course, but more important was the unusually and purposefully non-Christian, inclusive, generic language. But we are talking about the Constitution, the legal and binding authority we all are obligated to live under. The authorizing power is what Adams said it to be. He would know better than you, Pmh. Even better than the religious folk that were upset with the Founders for not catering to their delusions or common religious discrimination practices. So yes, the Constitution is a living document, because the People authorize and grant it, not God. It is founded on our authority - not pretense of mystery or miracle as the chief architect said. If you would like more direct and pertinent evidence of the Founders AND/OR Congress at that time agreeing with Adams and taking the same basic position, let me know. Evidence by the key players is much more pertinent and valuable than my opinion or yours.
The best human beings start good new topics and vote on the better posts. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
pmh1nic Pioneer100© Member
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
