Following Founders’ Wisdom An Unsafe Choice In Modern America

[CuteOldGuy]

How true is this? All someone has to do discuss the type of country the Founder's envisioned, and they get called all sorts of names, including unAmerican. Worse yet, we are libeled by the media, and ignored by politicians. Here's the article:

It’s a sad irony that American government has, over roughly the latter half of our Nation’s lifespan, so thoroughly reversed its Constitutionally defined role. It’s remarkable and hard to believe that government has cast to the margins those Americans possessed of the expectation that the Bill of Rights means today what it has always meant — and that it always should.

There are countless ways in which our leaders have incrementally and systematically betrayed the thinking of our Nation’s Founders. There are just as many ways our own government now seeks to betray those remaining citizens whose serious adherence to the Constitution targets them, in the eyes of Big Government, as extremists, relics and kooks:

Do you feel that the United States and other global military powers grow more and more borderless in their sphere of activity? Do you believe the justification for American military first action, occupation or police-state intervention gets more and more flimsy, more reliant on the discretion of the Commander in Chief, less considering of the Constitutionally devised tripartite system of checks and balances than ever before?

Do you believe that the conceptual line of demarcation separating wartime from peacetime in America has been purposefully obliterated by our Presidents and war-profiteering policy makers?

Do you really regard civil law enforcement officers in your city, county, State and Nation as citizen peers whose sworn (and compensated) duty is to answer to you and respond when another has criminally infringed on your safety or your property? Would you deign to speak to your servants and protectors as an equal, to let them know, face to face, your expectations and concerns about the public space you share and the private space you each hold dear?
Do you wish that the Federal Reserve would stop printing money to forestall crashing America’s debt-based, fiat economy, while simultaneously weakening our Nation’s ability to negotiate sensible trade agreements because of a devalued currency?

Do you have an inherent suspicion of building up a revealing online presence through the use of Facebook or Twitter? Maybe it’s not even a suspicion; maybe you’re just a very private person. Or maybe you simply believe in the experience of real things, that your outsized personality is too robust a thing to represent via facsimile on a rectangular computer screen.

Do you take responsibility for the manner in which you view, hear and read the information that purports to tell you what’s going on in the world around you? Do you feel that mainstream media lacks incentive to deliver that information to you? Do you prefer to get your news from a bevy of Internet sites that traverse the spectrum of political views?

If you’re among those who answer “yes” to some — or all — of these types of questions, know that it’s getting harder and harder to convince your elected leaders in today’s Washington that you don’t fit some government agency’s description of a domestic terrorist.

It’s small consolation that, were they alive today, the Founders would be right there with you.

Amen, brother!

http://personalliberty.com/2013/04/0...odern-america/

[Yssup Rider]

Long gone. They shat in outhouses. They owned slaves. They thought most diseases were consumption.

You're a fucking idiot to think the nation is or should be the same as it was before America had I door plumbing.

Ya basta!

[CuteOldGuy]

Principles are timeless, Assup.

[Yssup Rider]

And diamonds are forever, Unaliar!

Somehow, it just doesn't seem to ring true unless you make it part of an Abraham Lincoln meme, whiny...

[CuteOldGuy]

Ignore the Assup. The balance of this thread is reserved for intelligent comments. Thank you.

[Yssup Rider]

You have no right to shit on my Constitutional rights! The founders would stop beating their slaves and start beating you if they knew you would do such a thing.

Further, you are unlikely to get more than catcalls with this foolish blather.

So unless Im violating any Sandbox rules, which I'm not...

Go fuck yourself, you self righteous lying sack of shit.

[jbravo_123]

For one thing, the Founders didn't agree on everything (Hamilton, for example, didn't want to have a Bill of Rights at all). To say they all had the same vision takes a narrow view of history at best. To say we know exactly what they were thinking is arrogant at best.

As Yssup points out, there are many differences between the time period that the Founders lived in vs today (which is why the Constitution is meant to be a changable living document as opposed to something set in stone).

If the Constitution and what it meant was so cut and dry, we wouldn't have people devoting their entire lives to the study of it, much less need a judicial system at all.

As with all societies, all we can do is try to live by what we believe our Constitution means and to try and do what we believe works best for our society.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by jbravo_123

For one thing, the Founders didn't agree on everything (Hamilton, for example, didn't want to have a Bill of Rights at all). To say they all had the same vision takes a narrow view of history at best. To say we know exactly what they were thinking is arrogant at best. They didn't hide what they were thinking. They wrote a lot. You'd know if you could read.

As Yssup points out, there are many differences between the time period that the Founders lived in vs today (which is why the Constitution is meant to be a changable living document as opposed to something set in stone). Uh, tell the guys that wrote it that. If you want to change the Constitution, amend it. It doesn't change on its own.

If the Constitution and what it meant was so cut and dry, we wouldn't have people devoting their entire lives to the study of it, much less need a judicial system at all. No, people spend their lives trying how to twist and distort it to suit their political needs. They do it to provide cover in their efforts to control other people.

As with all societies, all we can do is try to live by what we believe our Constitution means and to try and do what we believe works best for our society. Then, essentially, according to you, the Constitution is a matter of faith, and the Supreme Law of the Land is whatever we think it is. Brilliant!

You people that want to do away with the Constitution through phony interpretation are sounding stupider all the time. You make this too easy. JBarfo, don't insult my intelligence with these lame platitudes. If you don't know anything, just admit it.

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You people that want to do away with the Constitution through phony interpretation are sounding stupider all the time. You make this too easy. JBarfo, don't insult my intelligence with these lame platitudes. If you don't know anything, just admit it.

Ah, so you believe every founder all wrote the exact same thing in all of their writings then? I guess in all of your reading and careful study of their works, you never found any differences of opinions between them. Adams and Jefferson were besties and agreed on everything, right?

I guess reality isn't usually factor in your arguments, right? What the Constitution does mean does in fact change on its own even without the amendment process. Do you really think the freedom of religion back then (in a time where it was almost unthinkable for anyone to be anything but a Christian) means the same thing it does today? How about freedom of speech? Do you really think the founders had political contributions or pornography in mind as free speech? In your deep studies of their writings, where did they address these issues specifically? I'm waiting for your citations on each founder and each issue.

The Constitution, like any other document, is one that's open to interpretation. It always has been. If you really think you and you alone (or anyone) know what the Constitution means exactly, then I don't have to insult your intelligence, you do it just fine on your own.

CoG, I used to at least have some modicum of respect for you because while I don't believe your views are feasible or correct, you at least seemed to have the ability to articulate them without resorting to playground name calling. Thanks for showing your true colors.

Here's a meme for you:

[Yssup Rider]

+1

I never knew him not to be a name caller, though. But you pegged it jbravo

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

+1

I never knew him not to be a name caller, though. But you pegged it jbravo

Hah I knew you guys always had it out between the two of you guys, but he was always at least civil to me. Ah well, honeymoon's over I guess and back to American politics as usual.

[bojulay]

Different ideas yeah, but they all came to an agreement on the
Constitution and realized the vital importance of doing so, even
though as individuals i'm sure they would have liked to add or
change different things in it.

Some people want to apply evolution to everything, even to our
Constitution. A dangerous concept.

If there was ever a near perfect article of law i'ts our Constitution,
leave it alone.

[Yssup Rider]

If its so perfect, the why has it been changed so many time, bouljay?

Are you telling me "evolution" doesn't happen to societies?

Naw, I don't think you know what you're telling me.

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by bojulay

Different ideas yeah, but they all came to an agreement on the
Constitution and realized the vital importance of doing so, even
though as individuals i'm sure they would have liked to add or
change different things in it.

Some people want to apply evolution to everything, even to our
Constitution. A dangerous concept.

If there was ever a near perfect article of law i'ts our Constitution,
leave it alone.

I'll tell you a secret: every empire believes they are and will always be the best. We may be the best now, but we haven't always been the best and we won't always be the best. I think that it's extremely naive to believe that in the less than 250 years our country has been in existence, we have somehow hit upon the most perfect societal contract.

Did the Founders give us an amazing start and great set of guidelines to base society on? Definitely. Did each of the Founders have some sort of superhuman ability to see across space and time and view all that would happen? Of course not. The Founders did, however, have the foresight to recognize that they could not possibly see what the future would be like and so they purposefully left the Constitution open to change and interpretation so future society could shape it to their needs.

[CuteOldGuy]

Sorry if I hurt your feelings, JBarfo. I was called many names before I started trying to fit in. It's just a part of the Sandbox. However, I disagree wholeheartedly that the principles espoused in the Constitution change with the times. Mechanics and strategies will change, but the principles are timeless.

Many of our Founders were not overt Christians. This country was not based on the Christian religion. The principles upon which we were founded are idealized in most all major religions, along with humanism and Wicca. Be free. Say what you want. Defend yourself against wrongdoers wherever they arise, including government. Your private stuff is private. When accused, people like you decide your guilt, not some bureaucracy. Believe in God? Go ahead. Whatever makes you happy. Choose your own friends. Government is independent of the press, so they can tell you the truth without interference. And so on.

This is what we have drifted so far away from. This is where I want to return. The idea of a "living Constitution" is one reason we are becoming a police state. A "living Constitution" is no Constitution. If the Constitution means whatever we want it mean, based on prevailing ideas and arguments of shyster lawyers, then we have no Constitution.

That's my point.