SavannahMann
Platinum Member
- Nov 16, 2016
- 14,540
- 6,816
Context. It is the most vital element in understanding anything, especially a part of the language. If you did not know the context, then the line from the Mending Wall by Robert Frost would make sense. “Good Fences make Good Neighbors”. But if you read the poem, you see that the effort in rebuilding the wall was wasted. Something there does not like the wall. Mending Wall by Robert Frost
Robert Frost was not advocating for fences, and the line taken out of context shows that the person doing so never read the poem.
Context is vitally important when reading and understanding the Second Amendment. This context is lost on another pundit today, and I wanted to set the record straight. Here at least. I doubt she will figure it out.
Perspective | Do we really understand the Second Amendment anymore?
The author starts out with a fairly concise and accurate history of our understanding of Freedom. But that historical understanding falls flat when she reaches the Second Amendment. It’s obvious she studied philosophy. Perhaps as part of some English Literature. But it is equally obvious she did not study history at the time of the Constitutional Convention.
In 1792 Congress defined what a Milita was. This is our context to understanding the meaning behind what the Second Amendment was intended to mean. Militia Acts of 1792 - Wikipedia
The Milita was every able bodied free man. Not members of the National Guard. Not members of the Military. It was everyone who could hold a rifle, and fight for their community, their state, or their nation. The well regulated meant that when the Militia was activated it was under the command of an officer appointed by the Governor of the State. The Milita was held to military type orders, and discipline. Today, the militia is still every able bodied free man or woman. We do not have the draft for women, but they are equally able to hold a rifle if necessary to defend their homes, communities, states, or nation.
This is vitally important to understanding the context of the language used. You see, meanings of words change over time. In a old book you may read the term Fagot, or Faggot. This was not a homosexual. The word has changed over time. It was a bundle of sticks to be used as fuel. Today, this term is derogatory and insulting. It is used to denigrate a homosexual, but in context of those old books, it had no such intent. The term Fag today is a cigarette in Britain. the definition of faggot
The contextual meaning of the Second Amendment has not changed, even as the language has. Today, the Militia is understood to be a Reserve or National Guard force. But that was NOT the meaning of the word when the Amendment was passed.
Without the context, the famous phrases we still quote from Shakespeare’s writings are meaningless. This above all; to thine own self be true. A piece of sage advice that would be lost in a generation without the context of the play Hamlet. Within that context, the message, the lesson, is far greater.
Context allows us to understand the Author’s intent. Context similarly allows us to understand the intent of the people who wrote, and ratified the Second Amendment. Without that context, History is a mystery that we shall never grasp. With that context, we gain a greater understanding than we now have. Without that context, we reduce the historical figures to their sins by todays standards.
We must understand our history in context. We must be able to view it through the eyes and ears of those at the time if we are ever to understand the intent.
EDITED: The first link was an old one that was inserted by mistake. The correct link has been inserted. Apologies
Robert Frost was not advocating for fences, and the line taken out of context shows that the person doing so never read the poem.
Context is vitally important when reading and understanding the Second Amendment. This context is lost on another pundit today, and I wanted to set the record straight. Here at least. I doubt she will figure it out.
Perspective | Do we really understand the Second Amendment anymore?
The author starts out with a fairly concise and accurate history of our understanding of Freedom. But that historical understanding falls flat when she reaches the Second Amendment. It’s obvious she studied philosophy. Perhaps as part of some English Literature. But it is equally obvious she did not study history at the time of the Constitutional Convention.
In 1792 Congress defined what a Milita was. This is our context to understanding the meaning behind what the Second Amendment was intended to mean. Militia Acts of 1792 - Wikipedia
The Milita was every able bodied free man. Not members of the National Guard. Not members of the Military. It was everyone who could hold a rifle, and fight for their community, their state, or their nation. The well regulated meant that when the Militia was activated it was under the command of an officer appointed by the Governor of the State. The Milita was held to military type orders, and discipline. Today, the militia is still every able bodied free man or woman. We do not have the draft for women, but they are equally able to hold a rifle if necessary to defend their homes, communities, states, or nation.
This is vitally important to understanding the context of the language used. You see, meanings of words change over time. In a old book you may read the term Fagot, or Faggot. This was not a homosexual. The word has changed over time. It was a bundle of sticks to be used as fuel. Today, this term is derogatory and insulting. It is used to denigrate a homosexual, but in context of those old books, it had no such intent. The term Fag today is a cigarette in Britain. the definition of faggot
The contextual meaning of the Second Amendment has not changed, even as the language has. Today, the Militia is understood to be a Reserve or National Guard force. But that was NOT the meaning of the word when the Amendment was passed.
Without the context, the famous phrases we still quote from Shakespeare’s writings are meaningless. This above all; to thine own self be true. A piece of sage advice that would be lost in a generation without the context of the play Hamlet. Within that context, the message, the lesson, is far greater.
Context allows us to understand the Author’s intent. Context similarly allows us to understand the intent of the people who wrote, and ratified the Second Amendment. Without that context, History is a mystery that we shall never grasp. With that context, we gain a greater understanding than we now have. Without that context, we reduce the historical figures to their sins by todays standards.
We must understand our history in context. We must be able to view it through the eyes and ears of those at the time if we are ever to understand the intent.
EDITED: The first link was an old one that was inserted by mistake. The correct link has been inserted. Apologies
