I acknowledge your belief that rights are inherent; and yes, I have read the Declaration carefully and I study the Constitution and our history of abusing it.
Your point that government is not a power that has a capability to confer rights on humanity is partially valid. But there is more to the argument.
George Washington: “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”
I believe I made it clear by putting my remark in the context of law. You put yours in a theological context. Please reconsider your argument with those differences in mind. We are talking of two different authorities. Despite your adherence to one, I believe it is prudent to admit that both exist and that both have the power to enforce their will in ways that they see fit.
posted on 07/30/2009 5:52:20 AM PDT
by Loud Mime
(More government jobs and benefits and more unemployment sets the stage for real disaster)
To: Loud Mime; bamahead
There should have been term limits written into the Constitution.
posted on 07/30/2009 5:57:42 AM PDT
(Brevity: Saying a lot, while saying very little.)
To: Loud Mime
I believe I made it clear by putting my remark in the context of law. You put yours in a theological context.
Completely understood. But there is ample evidence that even the folks that wrote these great documents believed that the theological context outweighed or superseded any written or codified law that the state could produce, which would disparage or limit those rights which are considered inalienable.
This is why it is clearly stated in the DOI that whenever the state and it's codified laws would become destructive or disruptive of these rights, the people retain the right to dissolute or abolish it as a transgressor, and start over.
posted on 07/30/2009 6:06:01 AM PDT
(Avoid self-righteousness like the devil- nothing is so self-blinding. -- B.H. Liddell Hart)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson