Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

THE ROOTS OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY (Authentic American Political Philosophy)
The Institute for American Liberty ^ | 1997 | J. David Gowdy

Posted on 05/01/2003 11:40:34 PM PDT by unspun

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last
AMERICA'S MORNING NEWS

Scores

Giants.............9+++
Shrugging Titans...0

1 posted on 05/01/2003 11:40:34 PM PDT by unspun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: unspun
bookmarked. thanks.
2 posted on 05/02/2003 12:00:28 AM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unspun; Carry_Okie; forester; sasquatch; B4Ranch; SierraWasp; hedgetrimmer; christie; comwatch; ...
PInging the short list.
3 posted on 05/02/2003 12:10:13 AM PDT by farmfriend ( Isaiah 55:10,11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *Ayn_Rand_List; *Wod_list; RJCogburn; Hank Kerchief; Libertarianize the GOP; donh; OWK; spunkets; ..
Wake up the children! Ping your neighbors! Bookmark the references! Look in, all who benefit from the sustaining power of truth, soul, and sacrificed blood, that established your privilege of being American!

All are invited to review authentic American Political Philosophy in this article and by links. Learn (objectively) the historical facts of what America has declared itself to be -- and why. Learn the principles woven into our successful experiment in self governance. Learn the ring of authenticity from the authors. Sense their conviction to self-evident truths. Know it by your "inner sense," as Locke described. Feel free!

(It is good to study the authentic, repeatedly -- the better to discern and declare the differences of counterfeits.)

___________________________________________
Algernon Sidney and John Locke even win on hairstyle.
Wavy hair, straight men.
4 posted on 05/02/2003 12:40:34 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unspun
An up late bump.
5 posted on 05/02/2003 12:47:06 AM PDT by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Liberty-loving, freedom-seeking atheists need not apply. What a waste of space.
6 posted on 05/02/2003 2:57:48 AM PDT by Misterioso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend
BTTT!!!!!!!!
7 posted on 05/02/2003 3:06:51 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Bump to the top.
8 posted on 05/02/2003 3:12:27 AM PDT by tet68 (Jeremiah 51:24 ..."..Before your eyes I will repay Babylon for all the wrong they have done in Zion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unspun; MeeknMing; sweetliberty; TheLion; dansangel; Mo1; BeforeISleep; Mudboy Slim
And as of this moment:

Iraq's 55 Most Wanted Scoreboard: 17 down, 38 to go! : )


Our second President, John Adams stated: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Why would Adams declare that our Constitution is made only for a moral people and a religious people?

Thanks for the ping, unspun. Looks like a great read. To be read later; bookmarked and

bumPING!

9 posted on 05/02/2003 3:32:55 AM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unspun; farmfriend
bttt
10 posted on 05/02/2003 3:40:22 AM PDT by Free the USA (Stooge for the Rich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Bump for later
11 posted on 05/02/2003 3:44:58 AM PDT by WhiteGuy (MY VOTE IS FOR SALE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unspun
In response to these rhetorical questions, I propose that liberty is not defined in a sentence, or as a rule -- Liberty is based upon certain principles -- the knowledge and application of which are required to fully comprehend and uphold liberty, respectively.

Isn't it sad that so-called libertarians (at least the FR type of libertarians) completely miss this point?

12 posted on 05/02/2003 5:52:58 AM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unspun
(It is good to study the authentic, repeatedly -- the better to discern and declare the differences of counterfeits.)

Studying the authentic is good. Confusing someone's elses of opinion of the authentic with the authentic itself is not.

13 posted on 05/02/2003 6:00:07 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
bumpity bumpity . . .


14 posted on 05/02/2003 6:25:25 AM PDT by MeekOneGOP (Bu-bye Dixie Chimps! / Check out my Freeper site !: http://home.attbi.com/~freeper/wsb/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Misterioso
I'm a freedom-loving atheist but I've come to the conclusion that it's a good thing our Constitution claims that our rights come from "God." Do they? No, how could they, there is no god. BUT.... what that "comes from God" claim does is draw a line in the sand over which our enemies should never step. It marks where we stop negotiating, explaining, reasoning and wheedling... and start shooting. It says, "No matter how well you argue, I am unreasonable on this point. You will never get me to give up on this point, even if you can make a great case for your side. Here is where, even if my intelligence fails, my emotions kick in and I will unapologetically bomb the snot out of you."

And that's GOOD, because people who have no line, no wall to place their back against, can be pushed all the way to the gulag.

15 posted on 05/02/2003 6:34:15 AM PDT by Anamensis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Thanks for the heads up!
16 posted on 05/02/2003 6:35:18 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: unspun; jmc813
James Madison stated: "To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea."

Indeed---but where did any of the Founders say that government could create virtue in the people, or that government was even fit to decide what "virtue" is?

17 posted on 05/02/2003 6:39:38 AM PDT by MrLeRoy ("That government is best which governs least.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Misterioso
Liberty-loving, freedom-seeking atheists need not apply. What a waste of space.

Oh come on, we love you man! Come read about the foundations of the freedom of how you worship / don't worship, that you enjoy!

18 posted on 05/02/2003 7:10:52 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Studying the authentic is good. Confusing someone's elses of opinion of the authentic with the authentic itself is not.

Authentic is essentially what is according to that which the authors... authorized.

19 posted on 05/02/2003 7:15:13 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Indeed---but where did any of the Founders say that government could create virtue in the people, or that government was even fit to decide what "virtue" is?

People have to discern such things as virtue and principle and govern themselves by them.

20 posted on 05/02/2003 7:32:46 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Authentic is essentially what is according to that which the authors... authorized.

And what we have here is a few carefully selected snippets of what the authors "authorized", and an opinion of what it means. The authentic is that which the authors authorized, complete and in context. Reading this is not "studying the authentic" any more than reading a review is watching the movie.

21 posted on 05/02/2003 7:38:35 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
And what we have here is a few carefully selected snippets of what the authors "authorized", and an opinion of what it means...

...plus links to intellectually sound analysis and to the source documents, themselves!

Enjoy!

22 posted on 05/02/2003 7:47:04 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: unspun
plus links to intellectually sound analysis and to the source documents, themselves!

The link to the Federalist Papers seems to be rather tenuous. The link to (deletion) should prove interesting reading.

23 posted on 05/02/2003 7:54:56 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
..didn't say you didn't have to go through the Web site's front page, etc.
24 posted on 05/02/2003 7:55:58 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Indeed---but where did any of the Founders say that government could create virtue in the people, or that government was even fit to decide what "virtue" is?

People have to discern such things as virtue and principle and govern themselves by them.

So in the context of the Wod_list, which you pinged, that's a vote against the War On Some Drugs.

25 posted on 05/02/2003 7:56:00 AM PDT by MrLeRoy ("That government is best which governs least.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
The link to (deletion)

?

26 posted on 05/02/2003 7:57:36 AM PDT by MrLeRoy ("That government is best which governs least.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: unspun
They have a link to (deletion) there?
27 posted on 05/02/2003 7:57:40 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
Hmmm... let's just say that in discussions regarding the most appropriate drug policy, discussion of what is and is not American political philosophy have come up and this should help to define.
28 posted on 05/02/2003 7:58:25 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MrLeRoy
(ii) And with respect to the distinctive principles of the government of the United States of America the best guides are:

(1) The Declaration of Independence;

(2) The "Federalist Papers" ; (deletion) and

(3) The Valedictory (Farewell) Address of President George Washington.

29 posted on 05/02/2003 7:59:17 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic; MrLeRoy
Be objective, now. I copied what they have. See what they actually show.
30 posted on 05/02/2003 8:01:39 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Be objective, now. I copied what they have. See what they actually show.

I promise to be at least as objective as the message that pinged me to this thread.

31 posted on 05/02/2003 8:03:28 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
That's the spirit!
32 posted on 05/02/2003 8:04:57 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Be objective, now.

Unless government can create virtue in the people, laws mandating virtuous behavior are pointless at best. What's unobjective about that?

33 posted on 05/02/2003 8:12:35 AM PDT by MrLeRoy ("That government is best which governs least.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Anamensis
And that's precisely why I'm not an atheist, because atheism leads to the gulag. So I can neither advocate, nor adopt, a belief system that lead to such dreadful consequences.

For the record I am a deist.

34 posted on 05/02/2003 8:14:16 AM PDT by Truthsearcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: unspun
People have to discern such things as virtue and principle and govern themselves by them.

What happens when bureaucrats and politicians discern virtue and principle differently than the people, and seek to govern others by them?

35 posted on 05/02/2003 8:39:27 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Thanks for the ping.
36 posted on 05/02/2003 8:54:17 AM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP (Ideas have consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
This is what a vote is for. We should understand what it means to cast a vote. We lack true information.

What is needed is a simple election process. Where there are web pages with forums and question and answers. Where the heat and reason of debate would show all faces.

At what point is it to vote someone in that has no virtue and is just a pretty face(Edwards).

37 posted on 05/02/2003 8:54:41 AM PDT by Baseballguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Baseballguy
This is what a vote is for. We should understand what it means to cast a vote. We lack true information.

There is a vast bureaucracy inside the beltway that has tasked itself with providing us with information, and have set themselves up as the arbiters of what "true information" is. These are the same bureaucracies that write the rules and regulations we live under, and provide our legislators with the information they use to pass laws that enable the regulators.

They will be the first to point to Washington's admonishments that we owe our allegiance and compliance to the government, and hold that as absolute.

38 posted on 05/02/2003 9:12:20 AM PDT by tacticalogic (Controlled application of force is the sincerest form of communication.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Baseballguy
People have to discern such things as virtue and principle and govern themselves by them.

What happens when bureaucrats and politicians discern virtue and principle differently than the people, and seek to govern others by them?

This is what a vote is for.

So when you said, "People have to govern themselves," you meant that the majority must impose its will on the minority. Funny how the founders placed such strict limits on what the federal government was allowed to do, majority vote or not.

39 posted on 05/02/2003 9:15:33 AM PDT by MrLeRoy ("That government is best which governs least.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Hello Nic (-:
Thanks for the ping
40 posted on 05/02/2003 10:22:42 AM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: unspun
It's amazing how many organizations with the words "freedom" and "liberty" in their names are actually very interested in curtailing freedom and liberty in the United States.

The words "God", "Jesus", "Christ" and "deity" appear nowhere in either the Declaration of Independence OR the Constitution. The word "Creator" appears in the Declaration of Independence. During the debate over the wording of the Declaration, a motion was made to add the words "our Lord, Jesus Christ" after the word "Creator".

It was defeated. What was that you were saying about our Constitutional liberty?

Don't I remember something about not bearing false witness?

41 posted on 05/02/2003 10:58:42 AM PDT by jimt (Is your church BATF approved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimt
The words "God", "Jesus", "Christ" and "deity" appear nowhere in either the Declaration of Independence OR the Constitution.

Well, to be precise you are correct. But to be precise, just as they referred to "our Creator" in the Declaration, they referred to "our Lord" in the Constitution.

Just as this infers, their writings indicate that they attempted to establish government that was secular in nature, but which at the same time acknowledged God as did the People (and their God in fact, in the name of Jesus Christ who was "our" i.e., their Lord).

Article VII.

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.

Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names.

Go Washington - President and deputy from Virginia
etc...

42 posted on 05/02/2003 11:31:19 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
In response to these rhetorical questions, I propose that liberty is not defined in a sentence, or as a rule -- Liberty is based upon certain principles -- the knowledge and application of which are required to fully comprehend and uphold liberty, respectively.

Isn't it sad that so-called libertarians (at least the FR type of libertarians) completely miss this point?

Yes, it is. I think it tends to stem from an inherent desire not to be accountable. (And so it is less missed, the next time I post a related article, I think I'll flag "News / Activism Free Republic" so it appears on the sidebar!)

43 posted on 05/02/2003 11:38:46 AM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: unspun
...in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven...

Exactly one citation, in the date of the document, does not a theocracy make, regardless of your wishes.

And Jesus was NOT the "Lord" of some of those folks - like Paine, Franklin and Jefferson, who were Deists.

The Founders were interested in protecting religious freedom, including the freedom of those who had NO religion. Selectively quoting and thumping your Bible harder won't make it any less true.

44 posted on 05/02/2003 11:50:26 AM PDT by jimt (Is your church BATF approved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: jimt
Exactly one citation, in the date of the document, does not a theocracy make, regardless of your wishes.

Exactly, and in accord with my wishes.

And Jesus was NOT the "Lord" of some of those folks - like Paine, Franklin and Jefferson, who were Deists.

Of those three, at least Franklin and Jefferson had to admit to at least a kind of lordship of Jesus, as they related.

The Founders were interested in protecting religious freedom, including the freedom of those who had NO religion. Selectively quoting and thumping your Bible harder won't make it any less true.

I don't disagree with that at all. If you find anyone who does, please introduce him to this thread.

45 posted on 05/02/2003 12:41:13 PM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: unspun
I don't disagree with that at all.

Then perhaps I misunderstood the thrust of the thread, and the comments about atheists.

46 posted on 05/02/2003 1:00:35 PM PDT by jimt (Is your church BATF approved?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: jimt
It's a matter of not confusing the sundry ideas that Americans might have, with the founding principles that are the bases for the freedom we all have to speak and act by them.
47 posted on 05/02/2003 1:03:26 PM PDT by unspun (It's not about you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Truthsearcher
And that's precisely why I'm not an atheist, because atheism leads to the gulag.

Most people claim to believe in God cause they really think there is one. It's refreshing to meet someone who admits that's not the real reason to believe.

48 posted on 05/02/2003 8:09:00 PM PDT by Anamensis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Anamensis; unspun
The impetus for my complaint is that unspun puts forward his spin on the rationale for the existence of man's rights. It annoys me that some religionists think it is their duty to teach us pagans about our rights. This evangelism becomes tiring for me after awhile.

Incidentally, what is the source for this article? I was unable to find it.

49 posted on 05/02/2003 8:10:45 PM PDT by Misterioso
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Anamensis
I don't *know* if God exists. But I have to have *faith* that he does, because an atheistic universe would mean that ultimately existence, and life, has no meaning.

IF life has no meaning then I see no reason why I should toil in it. It is my faith that ultimately all my struggles serve some meaningful purpose that keeps me at it.
50 posted on 05/02/2003 8:17:02 PM PDT by Truthsearcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson