Request for Advice Regarding a Website for a Statement of Conservative Principles

http://the12points.com/p/twelve-points.html ^ | July 2, 2009 | Karl Born

[Duodecim]

Last month, when we were discussing the Mount Vernon Statement, I mentioned a similar but more detailed statement of conservative principles, the Twelve Points. I am writing to ask whether anyone around here has had experience in embedding online petitions in a website (or using other tools to allow people who visit a website to "sign" the main document on the site). I would like to get this working before I begin promoting the Twelve Points again, but I haven't been able to find any usable information. Is there anyone who has had experience with this and who knows how to do it?

The Twelve Points are here: http://the12points.com/p/twelve-points.html

The Mount Vernon Statement's signature form at the bottom of the page is a good example of what I am trying to create, but there needs to be somewhere for the information to go and be processed: http://themountvernonstatement.com.

Finally, here is an explanation of my reasons for writing the Twelve Points, for those who were wondering: http://www.the12points.com/2010/02/twelve-points-are-definitive-statement.html

Thank you for your thoughts on this.

[iowamark]

I am afraid that your 12 points are too long for the general public. The only way to really understand Conservatism is to study history.

http://the12points.com/p/twelve-points.html

[Cobra64]

One would think the the Reoublican National Committee would have a statement of Conservative Principles.

Oh wait... the RNC Chairman spends all his time pushing his new book.

[A.A. Cunningham]

The Twelve Points

[dajeeps]

I like what the Constitution says as governing principles for the Federal level. Many protections of liberty are built into it. The problem is that nearly all of them have been broken down though systematic stomping by both congress and SCOTUS. If it were followed the only place the rest would fit in would be at the state level.

It seems like decades of Federal adventurism has confused people about what enumerated powers really means, what the Feds should be doing, and what kinds of debates should be going on in Congress.

For me, I guess I don’t really need a restatment of the obvious and I question the wisdom of political principles that are meant to apply to everything because when I send someone to DC, I want them doing nothing more than what the constitution allows, and not include things that would be part of our ideal world that would be beyond the authority granted by the Constitution. We got into the mess we are in by allow the Feds to step out of the box for what we may have thought were good reasons in the beginning but has turned out badly.

[Technical Editor]

If you bill it as “the 12 points,” you must deliver 12 points. Numbered points. Shorter statements. Way too long.

I’m a technical editor and I can work with you, but I need compensation because I haven’t any work now. Contact me if you’re interested.

[loveliberty2]

You have prepared a good site.

If "conservatives" truly wish to "conserve," or "preserve," the ideas of liberty upon which our Declaration of Independence and Constitution were based, then they need to identify those basic ideas, affirm them, and hold their elected representatives to them.

In the 1987 book, "Our Ageless Constitution," Part III consists of 25 pages, each of which identifies a principle underlying the Constitution. One principle is headlined, illustrated, and explained on each of the 25 pages, using the Founders' own words, in easy-to-understand format.

These were originally published as one-page magazine ads in North Carolina's premier magazine for business leaders in the years 1985-87, then incorporated into the book during the Constitution's Bicentennial Celebration.

The book is available here. Samples of the principles pages may be viewed and/or downloaded at .

Perhaps you might want to link to these two sites in order to expand on your own desire to promote and preserve the Founders' principles.

[Duodecim]

Thanks, and I actually agree with you. I think that even some of the sentences in the Twelve Points would be too long for a lot of people.

I see the Twelve Points partly as an abbreviated crash course (for the benefit of the many, many people who will never bother to study history or economics or to put any serious thought into the nature of justice) and partly as a preview, which I hope will spark something in the minds of some of the readers and jump-start their study of these topics. Those are two of the bigger functions that I have in mind for the Twelve Points.

Of course, even if the Twelve Points were successful in this (as a “crash course” and an advertisement for additional study), I doubt that a majority of Americans would understand most of these ideas. I think that there is something to be gained by extending their reach, though. In this country, a focused, active minority of the people can make a big difference.

[Duodecim]

Thanks. I very well might. I’ll need to get a look at the book myself, but based on those pages on the site, I’m guessing that it will be good. We need to use every tool we can to communicate these ideas (and facts).

[Duodecim]

Unfortunately, I am in the same situation, so I would be unable to pay. Good luck, though.

A few months ago, I did ask myself, “Why do I call this ‘the Twelve Points’? By my count, it makes about 165 points.”

Last year, I did write a short version of the Twelve Points. I also posted a list of the points themselves: http://www.the12points.com/2009/10/twelve-points-just-points.html. These shorter versions have their uses, but they lack the information that I think makes the full version valuable. I could consider a change in the name, though. (I realized yesterday that since Indiana has a small town called “Twelve Points,” I could drive out there and sign the document, renaming it “the Twelve Points Statement,” following the naming convention of the Sharon Statement and Mount Vernon Statement. Right now, I’m thinking of that as a joke, but ... maybe.)