Sir Robert Worcester wants to see the cornerstone of an interpretation centre laid in Runnymede in 2015.
Posted on 06/15/2013 9:00:13 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Sir Robert Worcester wants to see the cornerstone of an interpretation centre laid in Runnymede in 2015.
|
|
|
| GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach | |
|
|
To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. |
|
|
|
|
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Look for the same for the DOI and the Constitution at nation near you.
Inalienable rights first put to pen and codified into law.
The nuns in the Catholic school in the Chicago neighborhood of Bridgeport where I was brought up thought the event so important that 7th graders produced a play on the event for the entire school to watch.
Alas the school Immaculate Conception, and the parish no longer exist. But the church now re-named Holy Family still does run by a religious order. Point being it was a very significant event related to American history .
Under the Great Charter, you could not take a mans home to pay for a debt. This is incorporated into most state laws with Homestead provisions.
If he was a person who moved from place to place and had for instance a wagon and used it for business, you could not seize his way of making a living.
There are numerous clauses relating to civil rights.
Not easy to read though in the Old English!
Conservatives must note and learn that it was a conflict between the elites that gave us the Magna Carta as well as the US Constitution. The people had and always will have little to do with it.
Unless conservatives learn to not only leverage, but seek out the natural conflicts between elites we’ll just keep losing.
Thanks!
Have you seen some of the discussions on the difference between unalienable and inalienable rights?
No but, my phone typed inalienable and I just went with it.
Is there a thread?
About 45 years ago, Britain passed some laws to take the place of the Magna Carta. On member of THE HOUSE LORDS spoke on how this would clear the laws of a lot of “JUNK!”
This created such an uproar in the HOUSE that some of the older members who spent their time sleeping during the sessions actually woke up to take part in the debate.
and they still have crappy teeth and ridiculous accents.
Only part I like about England is they have all of Frances furniture from the many battles and wars over the centuries.
I wonder if the lack of interest has any connection of a dwindling Anglo population and massive infiltration of immigrants wanting to destroy the Anglo traditions?
***
Bingo
I noticed your link to the MC that mentioned the Torah. It’s an interesting thing to think about. Surely, God’s Laws existed before being revealed to Moses? Idolatry, murder, adultery must have been wrong prior to the Bereshit and from the moment Adam and Eve departed the Garden practiced.
I found this very interesting:
http://www.gemworld.com/USA-Unalienable.htm
Note that the drafts all stated “inalienable”, but the final versions all say, “unalienable”. Why the change? The important legal distinction between the words.
You can contract away inalienable rights, but unalienable rights can never be lost, even willfully. That’s one of those things that if taught for the last two generations could have kept us out of a lot of bad decisions and trouble.
The Magna Carta was based on remnants of the Roman legal system, surviving in the Latin-literate clerical population of England.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
