What "rights" does nature give us?

[Koios]

Not really. It was the justification for telling King George to fuck off.

You yap, but your squeals are absent meaning.

"Telling King George to fuck off" is a declaration that the this would be an independent nation - that we were founding our own country.

The orgins of our laws (Con) come from John Adams and Tom Jefferson being keen on reading Cicero in native Latin, not to mention other historical figures who had novel ideas on self-governance.

That's nice, utterly irrelevant, but nice.

But J Adams did most of the heavy-lifting, by drafting the first functioning constitution, ever (for the Commonwealth of MA). That was the template that most influenced the drafting of the US Con. No shit. Read a book, and you'll learn stuff, even sitting down. It's all good.

Again, utterly irrelevant to the question of whether the Declaration of Independence was the founding document by declaring that this would be an independent nation.

When you build a straw man, try to use straw with less mold, sparky.

Maybe this will help you understand (why you can't understand): you're a moron.

 

[SniperFire]

It was riddled with problems, the 13 colonies had the right to declare war but who would pay for it?

11 yrs later the constitution is socially constructed.

The Declaration if Independence was THE founding Document, however.

It established us as a defacto theocracy since it of course acknowledges that this great Nation would be founded on the keystone principle that we shall enjoy unalienable rights as granted by GOD.


Deal with it.

What a farce clearly many groups of people were left out of those unalienable rights.

No. Not at all.

Our laws and culture simply trailed the groundbreaking acknowledgement that man is meant to enjoy equal creation under God, with no subordination of his rights to others.

 

[Koios]

The Declaration if Independence was THE founding Document, however.

It established us as a defacto theocracy since it of course acknowledges that this great Nation would be founded on the keystone principle that we shall enjoy unalienable rights as granted by GOD.


Deal with it.

What a farce clearly many groups of people were left out of those unalienable rights.

No. Not at all.

Our laws and culture simply trailed the groundbreaking acknowledgement that man is meant to enjoy equal creation under God, with no subordination of his rights to others.

Correct. Only women and sub-humans (African slaves) were left out. Thankfully we fixed that oversight.

 

[SniperFire]

What a farce clearly many groups of people were left out of those unalienable rights.

No. Not at all.

Our laws and culture simply trailed the groundbreaking acknowledgement that man is meant to enjoy equal creation under God, with no subordination of his rights to others.

Correct. Only women and sub-humans (African slaves) were left out. Thankfully we fixed that oversight.

the Christians fixed that oversight, not you godless scum.

Hope that helps!

 

[Uncensored2008]

It was riddled with problems, the 13 colonies had the right to declare war but who would pay for it?

Irrelevant to the question of whether the DoI founded the American colonies as a separate and distinct nation.

11 yrs later the constitution is socially constructed.

Prior to which the Articles of Confederation were the binding legal documents.

What you need to grasp is that politics in 1780 were not entirely different than politics today. There were factions and competing agendas. Monarchists who similar to today's democrats, yearned for a dictatorship ruled from the top down. Jefferson, Madison, Mason, and the rest of the Libertarian forces were a strong voice, but the document of the Constitution was the product of negotiation and compromise. Not only did political philosophy clash, but the interests of the states clashed. Southern states sought a more feudal arrangement with a powerful class of land owners holding virtually all power, while the North embraced the budding industrial revolution and leaned toward liberty and equality. Crafting a constitution that would bring all the competing elements together was a balancing act.

It kills me to say this, but Dante is right, there are no men that could be trusted with crafting a constitution - nor have I heard anything from anyone that would be a significant improvement over the one we have.

 

[Michelle420]

It was riddled with problems, the 13 colonies had the right to declare war but who would pay for it?

Irrelevant to the question of whether the DoI founded the American colonies as a separate and distinct nation.

11 yrs later the constitution is socially constructed.

Prior to which the Articles of Confederation were the binding legal documents.

What you need to grasp is that politics in 1780 were not entirely different than politics today. There were factions and competing agendas. Monarchists who similar to today's democrats, yearned for a dictatorship ruled from the top down. Jefferson, Madison, Mason, and the rest of the Libertarian forces were a strong voice, but the document of the Constitution was the product of negotiation and compromise. Not only did political philosophy clash, but the interests of the states clashed. Southern states sought a more feudal arrangement with a powerful class of land owners holding virtually all power, while the North embraced the budding industrial revolution and leaned toward liberty and equality. Crafting a constitution that would bring all the competing elements together was a balancing act.

It kills me to say this, but Dante is right, there are no men that could be trusted with crafting a constitution - nor have I heard anything from anyone that would be a significant improvement over the one we have.

Makes no difference to me except that it is a pointer in revolt and something to keep in mind when questioning these documents that had a bias in nature.

And yet those dead men are trusted to this day.

Those men are dead and our post industiral society is alot different then those days.

Things are not bad enough in society that anyone would want to tackle a new one, but mind you if it were I'd welcome it with a lot of diversity of people working on it.

 

[SniperFire]

It was riddled with problems, the 13 colonies had the right to declare war but who would pay for it?

Irrelevant to the question of whether the DoI founded the American colonies as a separate and distinct nation.

11 yrs later the constitution is socially constructed.

Prior to which the Articles of Confederation were the binding legal documents.

What you need to grasp is that politics in 1780 were not entirely different than politics today. There were factions and competing agendas. Monarchists who similar to today's democrats, yearned for a dictatorship ruled from the top down. Jefferson, Madison, Mason, and the rest of the Libertarian forces were a strong voice, but the document of the Constitution was the product of negotiation and compromise. Not only did political philosophy clash, but the interests of the states clashed. Southern states sought a more feudal arrangement with a powerful class of land owners holding virtually all power, while the North embraced the budding industrial revolution and leaned toward liberty and equality. Crafting a constitution that would bring all the competing elements together was a balancing act.

It kills me to say this, but Dante is right, there are no men that could be trusted with crafting a constitution - nor have I heard anything from anyone that would be a significant improvement over the one we have.

Makes no difference to me except that it is a pointer in revolt and something to keep in mind when questioning these documents that had a bias in nature.

That the facts make no difference to you is quite telling.


LOL

 

[Uncensored2008]

I have a Blue Heeler with some red accents on paws and snout, which derive from the cross with Dingos.

And mine yearns to follow me or the GF, wherever we go. Thus, we, the governing body of that and 3 other dogs, determine its rights and freedoms.

Out in the "free" animal world, they can go where they wish, but being killed and eaten is a violent / frightening way to die. I think my dogs prefer the couch, bed, raw-food diet and frequent treats and ball-throwing, compared to the freedom enjoyed by coyotes who occassionally come onto the property in search of minimal survival eating of rabbits, and such.

But I merely speculate. They don't speak English, Portuguese nor Deutsche. So I have to project my thoughts onto them and hope they're their thoughts.

It's how it works in the human-animal contract.

Freedom is fraught with danger. The reason that most surrender freedom is in exchange for the illusion or reality of safety.

Humans form societies in which we trade some of our freedom for safety. Dogs form packs with the same result.

 

[Michelle420]

I have a Blue Heeler with some red accents on paws and snout, which derive from the cross with Dingos.

And mine yearns to follow me or the GF, wherever we go. Thus, we, the governing body of that and 3 other dogs, determine its rights and freedoms.

Out in the "free" animal world, they can go where they wish, but being killed and eaten is a violent / frightening way to die. I think my dogs prefer the couch, bed, raw-food diet and frequent treats and ball-throwing, compared to the freedom enjoyed by coyotes who occassionally come onto the property in search of minimal survival eating of rabbits, and such.

But I merely speculate. They don't speak English, Portuguese nor Deutsche. So I have to project my thoughts onto them and hope they're their thoughts.

It's how it works in the human-animal contract.

Freedom is fraught with danger. The reason that most surrender freedom is in exchange for the illusion or reality of safety.

Humans form societies in which we trade some of our freedom for safety. Dogs form packs with the same result.

Freedom is relative, but the documents imply everyone was equal back then and had rights , this was not true.


Let's just be honest about it.

It is what it is.

 

[Michelle420]

Irrelevant to the question of whether the DoI founded the American colonies as a separate and distinct nation.



Prior to which the Articles of Confederation were the binding legal documents.

What you need to grasp is that politics in 1780 were not entirely different than politics today. There were factions and competing agendas. Monarchists who similar to today's democrats, yearned for a dictatorship ruled from the top down. Jefferson, Madison, Mason, and the rest of the Libertarian forces were a strong voice, but the document of the Constitution was the product of negotiation and compromise. Not only did political philosophy clash, but the interests of the states clashed. Southern states sought a more feudal arrangement with a powerful class of land owners holding virtually all power, while the North embraced the budding industrial revolution and leaned toward liberty and equality. Crafting a constitution that would bring all the competing elements together was a balancing act.

It kills me to say this, but Dante is right, there are no men that could be trusted with crafting a constitution - nor have I heard anything from anyone that would be a significant improvement over the one we have.

Makes no difference to me except that it is a pointer in revolt and something to keep in mind when questioning these documents that had a bias in nature.

That the facts make no difference to you is quite telling.


LOL

What does it tell you?

 

[Koios]

I have a Blue Heeler with some red accents on paws and snout, which derive from the cross with Dingos.

And mine yearns to follow me or the GF, wherever we go. Thus, we, the governing body of that and 3 other dogs, determine its rights and freedoms.

Out in the "free" animal world, they can go where they wish, but being killed and eaten is a violent / frightening way to die. I think my dogs prefer the couch, bed, raw-food diet and frequent treats and ball-throwing, compared to the freedom enjoyed by coyotes who occassionally come onto the property in search of minimal survival eating of rabbits, and such.

But I merely speculate. They don't speak English, Portuguese nor Deutsche. So I have to project my thoughts onto them and hope they're their thoughts.

It's how it works in the human-animal contract.

Freedom is fraught with danger. The reason that most surrender freedom is in exchange for the illusion or reality of safety.

Humans form societies in which we trade some of our freedom for safety. Dogs form packs with the same result.

No argument. But laws that punish rape and thus mitigate the frequence at which rape occurs, dramatically, is no fucking illusion. Ask any woman.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What a farce clearly many groups of people were left out of those unalienable rights.

Your burning racism does not alter reality nor history.

The DoI was the founding document of this nation.

Tell me sparky, what nation do you think has a better constitution and form of government?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Maybe this will help you understand (why you can't understand): you're a moron.

I accept your surrender.

 

[Koios]

No. Not at all.

Our laws and culture simply trailed the groundbreaking acknowledgement that man is meant to enjoy equal creation under God, with no subordination of his rights to others.

Correct. Only women and sub-humans (African slaves) were left out. Thankfully we fixed that oversight.

the Christians fixed that oversight, not you godless scum.

Hope that helps!

Yes; it does help. I have a better grasp of your abject stupidity. Abolitionists were Americans, of many faiths and no doubt some without faith. Just as slave owners were Americans of many faiths and no doubt some without faith.

As for scum, Christians are roughly 75% or Americans and about the same percentage of our prison population; Athiests are roughly 10% or our population and less than 1% of our prison population.

Imagine that.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Correct. Only women and sub-humans (African slaves) were left out. Thankfully we fixed that oversight.

Women were not "left out," fucktard.

 

[Michelle420]

What a farce clearly many groups of people were left out of those unalienable rights.

Your burning racism does not alter reality nor history.

The DoI was the founding document of this nation.

Tell me sparky, what nation do you think has a better constitution and form of government?

I didn't write the document those old white men who wrote it are dead.

Do you understand what social construction is?

People treat these documents the same way they do the bible.

I know it is upsetting to purists when inconsistencies are pointed out, but look past that initial fear and face it there's room for improvement.

 

[Koios]

Maybe this will help you understand (why you can't understand): you're a moron.

I accept your surrender.

If that works for ya, enjoy.

 

[Michelle420]

Correct. Only women and sub-humans (African slaves) were left out. Thankfully we fixed that oversight.

Women were not "left out," fucktard.

The 19th US Constitutional Amendment, which gave women the right to vote in the US, was ratified on August 18, 1920

prior to that they had no choice in the matter.

 

[SniperFire]

Correct. Only women and sub-humans (African slaves) were left out. Thankfully we fixed that oversight.

the Christians fixed that oversight, not you godless scum.

Hope that helps!

Yes; it does help. I have a better grasp of your abject stupidity. Abolitionists were Americans, of many faiths and no doubt some without faith. Just as slave owners were Americans of many faiths and no doubt some without faith.

As for scum, Christians are roughly 75% or Americans and about the same percentage of our prison population; Athiests are roughly 10% or our population and less than 1% of our prison population.

Imagine that.

It was a hugely Christian movement. Education is good.

 

[Koios]

Correct. Only women and sub-humans (African slaves) were left out. Thankfully we fixed that oversight.

Women were not "left out," fucktard.

Right. Women had full voting rights, and were not chattel of their husbands, all thanks to the FF.

Good thinking, moron. Keep up the delusion you know shit. It'll help assure you never do.