Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (18897)	12/8/2004 1:19:25 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Constitutions do not have to be compendiums of law detailed item by item. The constitution is partly a framework and partly a raison d'etre. You cannot easily separate the two. For instance the separation documents of Canada were the Statute of Westminster and the British North America Act. These acts laid down the reasons for independence and structure of the country to be. The document of the British constitution was the Magna Carta. Within its 66 clauses are inherent the reasons for demands as well as the proposals of law. The DOI constituted a declaration of a new country. Its basis as a republic was declared, although not its complete and formal structure. Inherent in the declaration though, was its democratic nature. Ask an experienced defense lawyer. What is a constitution within a country? It is a formational document that gives a basis for a government. The DOI is seminal in this regard, regardless of whether it is ever referred to by a Supreme Court.(When they refer to intention of the framers, though they have to take the DOI into account) They do not have to be right! EG.. in Canada few judge would or will allow reference to the Magna Carta as precedent. Yet it was. Ignorance is the only answer to that. Informed legal opinion could hardly separate the most important legal document in Britain from its governed colonies. The very intransigence of British parliament in not allowing precedents, inheritances and representation of British law to benefit Britain's colonists, led the American colonists to rebel in the first place. Their DOI was the "constitution" of that separation. One of the only references to the Magna Carta in Britain in modern times was in British court in the 1980's. A lawyer challenged speed traps because the Great Charter forbade the laying of charges by a king's man without the testimony of two citizen of the realm as well. The Speed Trap Radar is not two citizens. Upon consideration the courts were obliged to disallow radar traps and all cases were thrown out for one year or more. As a matter of fact, so were parking tickets. It took a special act of British Parliament to validate the traffic act processes that depend solely on an officer's testimony. There is no doubt that it was done unconstitutionally. The whole science of lawyering was invented by the Plantagenets over a 400 year period, circumventing the Magna Carta's protective provisions in order to allow the French Kings to raise money off the people in usurious ways and jail their political enemies. EC<;-}

To: TigerPaw who wrote (18897)	12/8/2004 1:25:09 AM
From: Greg or e	Respond to of 28931

<<<On what basis do you think the framers believed all men were entitled to equal protection?>>> "The Declaration of Independence was not the basis for our country." You are way off base. I did not claim the DOI was the basis for the USA. What the DOI does is demonstrate that the framers of the constitution believed that universal human rights flowed from the "self evident truth" that God created all men. This does not contradict the Christian teaching. For instance Acts 17: "So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, "Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects. "For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, 'TO AN UNKNOWN GOD ' Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, 'For we also are His children.' "Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man."Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead." Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, "We shall hear you again concerning this." So Paul went out of their midst. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them."