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

Skip to comments.

Jaffa vs. Mansfield: Does America Have A Constitutional or A “Declaration of Independence” Soul?
The Claremont Institution ^ | November 29, 2002 | Thomas G. West

Posted on 03/29/2005 4:54:49 PM PST by nosofar

What were the original principles of the American Constitution? Are those principles true?

Many historians and political scientists write about the first question. Scholars are never shy about telling us what happened in the dead-and-gone eighteenth century. But few of them think it is even worth discussing whether the Founders' principles are true. For example, in a review of my book Vindicating the Founders, historian Joseph Ellis accuses me of having committed "sins of presentism." My error, as he cleverly puts it, is believing "that ideas are like migratory birds that can take off in the eighteenth century and land intact in our time." Ellis does not even try to refute the Founders' principles or their arguments, summarized in my book, regarding property rights, women's rights, and welfare policy. For him, it is enough simply to dismiss my endorsement of their arguments and ideas as "bizarre."1


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: constitution; declaration; independence; jaffa; mansfield
This is a very long read. I'm probably summarizing this wrong, but Mansfield seems to support a utilitarian concept of the Constitution. Jaffa supports something more based on the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Skip the first half if you don't have time to read the whole thing. Sure the article is a couple years old, but it was still interesting and I didn't find it in a search.
1 posted on 03/29/2005 4:54:49 PM PST by nosofar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nosofar

Ummm...I think the Civil War settled this issue.


2 posted on 03/29/2005 5:10:09 PM PST by Harpo Speaks (Honk! Honk! Honk! Either it's foggy out, or make that a dozen hard boiled eggs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nosofar
Does America Have A Constitutional or A “Declaration of Independence” Soul?

This is the single biggest thing few people understand. WE HAVE BOTH!

The Founders believed the world was composed of 2 elements. The REAL, or natural world, which consisted of people, the earth, etc. This was ruled by NATURAL LAW. The right to survive, to stake territory, to defend oneself if attacked.

The other world was ARTIFICAL. This is the world we created for ourselves. Things like the governments, both federal and the states. This was the political world, ruled by positive, or man-made law.

They then constructed our country with 2 separate types of law ... one for each of the 2 types of 'worlds'.

Natural law, or the law of Nature and natures God was for the people. These are Commandments 6 through 10 of the 10 Commandments.

These Commandments define CRIME.

Affidavit in Support of the Ten Commandments

Positive, or man-made laws was for government, but since man created government, man was ALWAYS superior TO government.

THAT IS WHAT IS MEANT BY A 'REPUBLICAN' FORM OF GOVERNMENT!

This is one of the writing the Founders used while constructing our government:
Of the Simplicity of Criminal Laws in different Governments
In republican governments, men are all equal; equal they are also in despotic governments:
in the former, because they are everything;
in the latter, because they are nothing.

THE SPIRIT OF LAWS Book VI By Charles de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu

Oh, BTW here are the current legal definitions of the 2 types of law...just in case no one believed they still exist;

(law.com)

natural law
n. 1) standards of conduct derived from traditional moral principles (first mentioned by Roman jurists in the first century A.D.) and/or God's law and will. The biblical Ten Commandments, such as "thou shall not kill," are often included in those principles. Natural law assumes that all people believe in the same Judeo-Christian God and thus share an understanding of natural law premises.

2) the body of laws derived from nature and reason, embodied in the Declaration of Independence assertion that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

3) the opposite of "positive law," which is created by mankind through the state.

positive law
n. statutory man-made law, as compared to "natural law," which is purportedly based on universally accepted moral principles, "God's law," and/or derived from nature and reason.

The government has tricked everyone into believing they fall under the juristiction of positive law.....and we DON'T!

3 posted on 03/29/2005 5:25:31 PM PST by MamaTexan (The foundation of a Republic --- Man owes obedience to his Creator...NOT his creation!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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