Posted on 12/20/2007 6:49:31 AM PST by Loud Mime
"Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government which impartially secures to every man whatever is his own." This was before the trial lawyers started making substantial donations to politicians. . . "Strangers are welcome because there is room enough for them all, and therefore the old Inhabitants are not jealous of them; the Laws protect them sufficiently so that they have no need of the Patronage of great Men; and every one will enjoy securely the Profits of his Industry. But if he does not bring a Fortune with him, he must work and be industrious to live."
“Let the pulpit resound with the doctrine and sentiments of religious liberty. Let us hear of the dignity of man’s nature, and the noble rank he holds among the works of God.”
"As riches increase and accumulate in few hands, as luxury prevails in society, virtue will be in a greater degree considered as only a graceful appendage of wealth, and the tendency of things will be to depart from the republican standard. This is the real disposition of human nature; it is what neither the honorable member nor myself can correct. It is a common misfortunate that awaits our State constitution, as well as all others." "Is, then, the Federal Government, it will be asked, destitute of every authority for restraining the licentiousness of the press, and for shielding itself against the libellous attacks which may be made on those who administer it?
No government ought to be without censors & where the press is free, no one ever will.
James Madison (Essay on Property, 29 March 1792)
Benjamin Franklin (Those Who Would Remove to America, February 1784)
John Adams
Alexander Hamilton (speech to the New York Ratifying Convention, June 1788)
The Constitution alone can answer this question. If no such power be expressly delegated, and if it be not both necessary and proper to carry into execution an express power--above all, if it be expressly forbidden, by a declaratory amendment to the Constitution--the answer must be, that the Federal Government is destitute of all such authority."
James Madison Report on the Virginia Resolutions, Jan. 1800 Writings 6:385--401
Thomas Jefferson (letter to George Washington, 9 September 1792)
“I deem the present occasion sufficiently important and solemn to justify me in expressing to my fellow-citizens a profound reverence for the Christian religion and a thorough conviction that sound morals, religious liberty, and a just sense of religious responsibility are essentially connected with all true and lasting happiness; and to that good Being who has blessed us by the gifts of civil and religious freedom, who watched over and prospered the labors of our fathers and has hitherto preserved to us institutions far exceeding in excellence those of any other people, let us unite in fervently commending every interest of our beloved country in all future time.”
W. H. Harrison
I am now on my soap box. Please be patient.
Some people say that the Separation of Church and State exists tacitly in our Constitution. The fact is, it does not. Similar to these statements below, Thomas Jefferson used the term in a personal writing to a Baptist Minister in response to a question from the church. The detractors of today have taken it out of context for their personal agenda. The statements below reflect the deepest thoughts of our Founding Fathers. From these, you can see just how far we traveled from the Founders intent. It saddens me that our children will not see the America I grew up with. Patriotic, Compassionate, and Free. God bestowed us with a great nation and those who detest God are trying to bring it down. Unfortunately, their inroads are far too great today and we must, at some point begin to push back for the sake of our future generations. We are celebrating the Birth of Christ next week and had this miracle of miracles not happened we would not be as were are today, truly blessed. We have been given the blessings of God to make our world a better place. It is our mandate, and we should never let those who want to remove the word of God from our society succeed.
I am now off my soap box.
It’s just nice to see Founder’s quotes, no matter on what topic. Their Worth in hills of beans in some people’s eyes, but founders like “Randy” Ben Franklin (could have been played by Anthony Quynn in the movie), Alex Hamilton, and Jimmy Madison can find the hearts of anyone who cares about liberty.
Good morning!
In the quote by Alexander Hamilton, what is classical definition of the term ‘republican standard’ to which he is clearly referring?
I will answer this in my way, and invite other Freepers to do the same.
I find no strict definition of the republic that the founding fathers created. But if you look at their creation, and their sales pitch for that creation, you can distill what they meant.
The Founders believed:
Their current selective application of law, coupled with the invidious remarks continually spat out on the floors of the legislature, and the Fed's terrible stewardship of retirement accounts, education and its own bureaucratic bloat provide subtstantial evidence that the republican standards are being ignored.
How do you argue with a person whose citations are variable to personal whim?
That has been the liberal MO, the Constitution is up for interpretation as society changes.
The government practice of separating church and state took hold in the nineteen hundreds, mostly in the latter half of the century. But this is not where the separation is rooted. The separation is rooted in the Reconstructionist Fourteenth Amendment, and I have no delusions it is a Republican amendment as the Republican Party controlled most state governments at the time and the federal government, all of which were necessary for ratification.
In 1925, the Republican controlled US Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Taft, the former President, used the Fourteenth Amendment to change the republican form of government the founders had given in the US Constitution. The court created the “Incorporation Doctrine”, and in so doing, extended the prohibitions placed upon the federal government to all states. Until this doctrine, and the application of the doctrine, states were free to apply religion to government institutions. Some states even had official state religions, primarily Southern states.
Gone with the “Incorporation Doctrine” were the many republics that formed our nation, replaced by one republic.
Too many conservatives today wish to conserve that which they were born into, which is a nation with the “Incorporation Doctrine”, and not the nation given by the Founders. What these conservatives conserve is a nation very different from what the Founders intended. The only way back is the repeal of the Fourteenth Amendment, which would make moot the "Incorporation Doctrine".
The argument of strict construction versus loose construction goes back 200 years, and it was based on practical politics rather than highfalutin theory. In the period after the War of 1812, Webster, Clay and Calhoun started out on one side of the divide and ended up on the other as the issues changed.
Let me give you a quote. "The United States Constitution means what the American people wish it to mean." If I told you that was said by an American president and asked you which one, you'd probably pick FDR. But it was said by John Quincy Adams in 1826.
Your choice of Earl Warren as the dividing line -- even though you didn't name him specifically, using the "second half of the 1900's" as your line of demarcation -- is not completely accurate. John Marshall, the "Great Chief Justice", was the Earl Warren of his era and was just as controversial. Marshall was the archetype of the loose constructionist and expanded federal power starting with Marbury in 1803.
I would recommend you read States' Rights and the Union by Forrest McDonald. It tracks the changes in constitutional construction and the concept of federalism for the first 100 years of the Republic.
Thanks for the referral is noted. However, the framers in my opinion did not leave the Constitution open to revision based on the moral thoughts of the day.
” Your choice of Earl Warren as the dividing line — even though you didn’t name him specifically, using the “second half of the 1900’s” as your line of demarcation — is not completely accurate. John Marshall, the “Great Chief Justice”, was the Earl Warren of his era and was just as controversial. Marshall was the archetype of the loose constructionist and expanded federal power starting with Marbury in 1803.”
After reading this I assume you meant this part for someone else because my thoughts were not on the subject you have provided above. If I am confused as to your post, please excuse my lack of understanding.
That portion of the reply should have gone to someone else. Sorry.
When I learned the German language, I learned much about the English language as well. I never realized how silly my native tongue was; we have WIND....is it how you wind a clock or is it the horizontal movement of air? Examples of exceptions abound in our language, which sets the ground for mutating the law by mutating the meanings of the words.
The only thing that has changed is some people’s tolerance for crime and perversion. In that course, they are intolerant of those who are intolerant of their beliefs, but they call themselves tolerant.
We’re back to A=A.
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.