Posted on 06/08/2012 1:21:30 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
ROSEMONT, Ill.—Rick Santorum and Ron Paul have never gotten along, and while the primaries are effectively over, their intraparty rivalry could stretch on through the summer.
With 267 delegates pledged to him so far, Santorum is planning to flex his muscle at the Republican National Convention in August, where he predicted Friday there could be a showdown over the party platform between the social conservative delegates who pledged support for him and Ron Paul's libertarian supporters. Paul's campaign predicts that about 200 delegates will attend the convention on his behalf.
Both want a piece of the party platform, but the candidates agree on very little politically. Speaking to reporters here Friday at a conservative conference, Santorum said his supporters are ready for a "fight" in Tampa.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
A person is a person, remember?
Do you have any plan at all for what you're going to do when the USSC tells you that you do not have the authority to do what it is you're promsing to do?
Is the term "person" used in the Constitution statutory or biological?
It's quite obvious that they are talking about the God-given, unalienable rights of innocent individual flesh and blood human beings to live.
Anyone with even the most rudimentary reading comprehension skills can easily see this.
-- The Declaration of Independence "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." -- The Preamble, or Statement of Purpose, of the United States Constitution "No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law." -- The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution "No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." -- The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."
In the strictest sense it is both statutory and biological, the Constitution being the supreme law of the land, and human persons being what they are by nature.
And in the portions of the Constitution under discussion here they weren't talking about corporations, no matter how the relations between the law and corporate entities might have been later constructed or construed.
How about Article I, Section 2. What kind of “persons” are they referring to there?
"The public good is in nothing more essentially interested than in the protection of every individual's private rights.""Those rights, then, which God and nature have established, and are therefore called natural rights, such as life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws to be more effectually invested in every man than they are; neither do they receive any additional strength when declared by the municipal laws to be inviolate. On the contrary, no human legislature has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the owner shall himself commit some act that amounts to a forfeiture."
-- William Blackstone
Cute. Yes, I suppose when you are talking about individual flesh and blood human beings and you put an “s” on the end of person to denote all of such persons living within a certain jurisdiction for the purpose of the census, that would be a “corporate” entity in some sense. LOL... Just not in any sense that changes any of the facts that are on the table in this discussion.
I find it extremely humorous that you had to go to a portion of the original document that was amended by the Fourteenth Amendment for that. Heh...too funny.
What happened to "statutory person" being nothing more than a "euphamism"? Are you making this up as you go along?
2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State,
Statutory persons, or biological persons?
No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years,
Twenty five years from when?
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
The burden is on you to prove that the framers specifically intended to exclude a certain subsection of what you have already admitted are biological persons.
It certainly isn't in the text of either the Fifth or the Fourteenth Amendments.
"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.""No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."
No exceptions to be found there.
They are obviously referring to individual biological persons, citizens or not, not corporate entities.
If they meant citizens, they would have said citizens. A distinction they clearly made in Section One.
Did they count them in the census? If they considered them "persons" then they're entitled to representation. If they don't get counted then they're being denied representation.
What did they consider the "0 point" of a person's age, when they were first recognized as a person?
From birth, obviously.
That's when the privileges and immunities of citizens begin.
The God-given, unalienable right to life of persons begins at creation however.
-- The Declaration of Independence
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."
That's when the privileges and immunities of citizens begin.
Then why does it say you only have to have been a citizen for 7 years instead of 25?
Again, you're conflating the privileges and immunities of citizens and the God-given rights of individual persons.
Again, all citizens are persons, but not all persons are citizens.
The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment understood this simple distinction perfectly.
Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
A foreign visitor to our country doesn't have a right to vote or run for office. But, their rights to life, liberty and property are protected in each and every jurisdiction.
They state explicitly that the number of Representatives a State shall have will be determined by on enumeration of persons, not citizens. Every person gets counted, regardless of whether they are a citizen or not.
That’s what I already said. So?
So who did they count? If they recognized unborn babies as legal "persons" they would be counted in the census. Did they count them?
And since you're a fan of questions with seemingly self-evident answers: If a person is twenty five years old, how long have they been a person?
Counting unborn persons in a census is a practical impossibility. So much so that the framers didn’t even consider such a thing. But the inability to count them does not equate to a right to kill them.
No one ever said that there aren’t practical differences between those persons who are born and those who have not yet been born and how the world must, out of the necessities created by their natural state, interact with them. There obviously are.
But the intrinsic, natural, moral qualities of both sorts of persons are identical. Their rights are God-given and unalienable, from their creation, as the founders held to be self-evident in the Declaration.
It is not an unalienable right to be counted in a census. But the right to live is.
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.