Posted on 10/03/2009 8:17:34 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
Thanks to the summary of republican principle contained in the U.S. Declaration of Independence, we have a succinct basis for doing both. The defining goal of republican government is to secure the unalienable rights with which their Creator has endowed all human beings. On account of this goal, the republican form characteristically confines government to the exercise of "just powers" derived "from the consent of the governed." Though still very familiar to many Americans, we too rarely pause to consider the full implications of the Declaration's words. Though consent is the sine qua non for the government's exercise of just power, consent is not the substance of justice. That substance consists in the Creator's provision of unalienable rights as an aspect of human nature. The governed may choose from among the range of government powers that secure these rights (government's "just powers") those which are suitable to their circumstances. Unjust powers of government (those that do not serve the goal of securing their unalienable rights) are not legitimized (made lawful) by the consent of the governed. So, though it is an essential feature of republican government, the sovereignty of the people is not absolute. It is subject to the Creator's prior provision for justice, to the higher law constituted by His will... This is the key point ignored (or else willfully neglected) by the Ron Paul nationalists. It was also neglected (or simply rejected) by the states' rights advocates for slavery before the Civil War. From a republican point of view, their states' rights arguments were fatally flawed because no state government can claim the power to legitimize (make lawful) that which contravenes the Creator's provision for justice.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Keyes gets it right again. It’s too bad that even the Republican party all too often forgets these basic principles that should be stamped on the heart of every American.
Keyes gets it right again. It’s too bad that even the Republican party all too often forgets these basic principles that should be stamped on the heart of every American.
the very person that authored the Declaration of Independence was himself a slave owner, as were many that signed it. Apparently they were not aware of this “republican” principle
Actually, they were very well aware of this principle, that God's law is higher than man's law and must be the basis of natural law and all just law. That is the basis of everything they believed and did.
That doesn't mean that, having grasped that truth, that they saw all the way to the end of the road, and understood the full consequence of the truths that they had dimly begun to understand enough to stake their lives on them.
Men are always limited by the times they live in, and shaped by the culture that shaped them, even revolutionaries who reshape their times are limited by their times. Some of the men of the time understood that the logic of their principles did in fact make slavery a great sin, and tried to outlaw it from the beginning. But not everyone could see it, which is why it remained until their grandchildren were able finally to do something about it.
They took that truth as far as they could take it. Their grandchildren took it a little farther, and the full meaning of it is yet to unfold. It falls to us to keep pushing, keep moving it down the road.
We believe in the separation of powers as a way of preserving liberty; if one branch oppresses, you have two other branches to appeal to. The vertical separation has the same purpose. If the feds oppress, you appeal to the states, if the states oppress you appeal to the feds. The purpose, though, is always liberty under God. Forget that and any level or branch of government can become your oppressor.
Dr. Keyes is offbase, the Citizens are Sovereigns in the US, the “highest law” as it were.
To say otherwise is to deny “inalienable” and substitute “except for”
I dont know if they thought the negros to be 'sub human' or that they simply didnt 'practice what they preached', but at least they did preach it...
We have a government of laws, not men. We’re a constitutional republic, based on the rule of law, not a democracy.
To put it another way, the understanding that law must be subject to "natural law", which is to say "God", is what separates a republic from a democracy that self-destructs in a generation. The founders understood that very well, its in every line of everything they wrote.
Now, working that out in the practical world over the generations is what we call "politics" and its what we call "history".
Awesome! 2 heels going against each other. It’s Wrestlemania 2009 of fringe conservatism. Vince McMahon eat your heart out.
With all the crap going on in DC, Keyes takes aim at the less than 1% of voters who know about him or Paul. I might almost be tempted to read it.
Hmmm... I seem to recall quite a bit of back and forth between McCain, Romney, and Rudy at times. And we were stuck hoping the least socialistic one got the nomination. Then ended up with maybe the most socialistic one and he lost anyway. If Ron Paul and Alan Keyes are the fringe, I’ll take that any day over a mainstream pubbie that I can’t tell from a dem.
Here is an excellent article concerning slavery in 1776 and the Founders. The majority of the Founders thought the institution of slavery was evil. Revisionists try to make the Founders into evil racists to undermine the brilliance of these men and their ideas. Slavery existed in the colonies hundreds of years before 1776.
One of the strongest abolitionists was John Adams who never owned a slave. They created the seeds that led to the abolition of slavery in certain states right after the Revolution, but were not entirely successful in some states because slavery was such an entrenched, ancient (accepted) institution, practiced throughout the world.
http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=122
:’D Nice summary!
Very well said. Furthermore, the Declaration would never have been made (let alone the Constitution) had the issue been debated in 1776.
bookmark for reference - founders and slavery
I’ll take that any day over a mainstream pubbie that I can’t tell from a dem.
Obama is just more of the same to you. I see a difference. The nice thing about giving up on political relevancy is you never have to take responsibility for Socialized Medicine, Cap and Tax, and our dead soldiers in Afghanistan. Good luck convincing the rest of the country of the superiority of your ideology.
Need to read this later.
Crazy versus Crazy — I suspect Keyes envies L-Ron’s little horde of wackos.
Who said anything about a “democracy”?
We are Constitutional Republic with Citizen Sovereigns who merely delegate Authority to Government with the implicit understanding that Government is limited by the Bill of Rights.
The same Bill of Rights that grants all inherent power to Citizen Sovereigns via the 9th Amendment:
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”
I'm a long-time Ron Paul supporter, and damn proud of it, always ready to provide a defense of his consistent and principled domestic and foreign policy positions to anyone with the mental capabilities to comprehend my argument.
You're apparently just a gutless little coward who can't articulate rational criticism of the good doctor, so you post insults over the 'net... insults that you would never make face-to-face.
Still, the people are constrained by the Sovereignty of God, and His will, which is expressed in the natural law.
Are you pro-choice for states like Dr. Paul?
Actually, the compromise, one which we’re still paying a heavy price for by the way, was to obtain the Constitution, not the Declaration.
Men are not a law unto themselves. The idea that they are is what has gotten this country into the fix it's in.
I am not a libertarian by any means, there still needs to be rule of law, and national defense still trumps isolationism. I would take Keyes and Paul in a heartbeat over the spinelss “believe in nothing so we believe in anything” republicans we have today. Spineless, gutless, wonder boys and girls straddling a barbed wire fence gettin their “parts” rubbed raw.
The issue of slavery threatened to derail the Constitutional Convention. The Southern states were intractable in this regard. Compromise was made to obtain the document’s passage. I think that compromise could rightfully be called “America’s original sin,” for which Lincoln’s generation paid a steep price in blood and treasure.
“worth exploring how these same men rationalized the limitation of “republican” principles to certain races, sexes, classes of citizens...”
This may explain the attitude...
Jesus is recorded as mentioning slaves in one of his parables. It is important to realize that the term “servant” or “maid” in the King James Version of the Bible refers to slaves, not employees like a butler, cook, or maid.
Many have observed both Jesus and the Apostles’ lack of condemnation of slavery as its tacit endorsement.
IMHO..they avoided the topic being very conscious as it were, of the fact they were already threatening enough of the power structure...
A difference? McCain wanted to tax medical benefits and favored Cap and Tax before Obama even mentioned it. McCain rushed back to d.c. in the middle of his campaign to make sure to bail out the big 3, etc. etc. Then after all that he basically dissed Sarah Palin every chance he got. The only difference was in the tiny details of all the socialist policies.
My ideology? Freedom and Equality Under the Law. If the rest of the country doesn’t want it, woe to us all.
I’m standing right there with you amigo. Just give them time. Hopefully the RP detractors will come around. Some of my life-long friends gave me holy hell about supporting Ron Paul (lol since the 80’s). You know the drill: Economic policy? Right on. Foreign policy? Makes Ted Turner look like a neocon!
It took seeing their sons, daughters, nieces, nephews and grandkids being asked to fight undeclared wars with one hand tied behind their back (rules of engagement) to come around on the foreign policy. They lived through (or fought in) Vietnam so they remember what it was like to fight a war ran out of the Whitehouse. And they know where we are likely to end up as a result.
They eventually came around, one by one, to the realization what he is saying is correct. Now they give ME a hard time because I occasionally disagree with RP on certain issues.
I am a libertarian and I believe in a hyper-capable national defense and “serious” law, meaning congress doesn’t enact laws banning light bulbs and controlling toilets flushes.
You description of the d.c. crowd is spot on. They live is dread fear of offending anyone popular or in the media and attack people like RP and AK who are trying to keep dyed-in-the-wool communists at bay. Remember McCain in the debates stating over and over again that he “reached across the aisle”? The communists never do that, and yet he seems to think it’s virtuous to allow a little socialism here and there to get along. It was truly disheartening.
Keyes here sounds a lot like Harry Jaffa. Jaffa argues that the US Constitution is anchored in natural law principles invoked by the Declaration. He sees himself as following the lead of both the Founding Fathers and Lincoln.
Of course, Jaffa’s been in a decades-long dog fight with self-proclaimed “Burkean” Conservatives like Wilmoore Kendall, Russell Kirk, M. E. Bradford and their fellow travellers. This “Burkean” group argues that Jefferson was an Enlightenment ideologue — i.e., a real stinker — and that the Declaration has no legal standing and thus no significance in connection with the Constitution. What makes this dog fight particularly vicious is that both sides think they are defending the Constitution (especially from Liberal attacks).
However, Keyes doesn’t make a very clear statement about what he finds objectionable in the “Ron Paul nationalist” position. Are the Paulites really that wedded to the idea that the sovereignty of the people is absolute? Could somebody give me a Paulite example of this?
In our system men certainly are the “highest law” as they select whom implements statutory law restrained by the Constitution.
The problem in Keyes’s argument is he is not giving the Citizen Sovereigns their due, he is looking at Governance as a top down affair, and in the US it most certainly is not.
As a person of Faith, I agree, however “endowed” is not an either or situation, men in the US have by internal virtue the rights enumerated, the mere act of creation by God of mankind has placed that into “us”.
What mankind then chooses to do with them, or to even recognize the source of such inalienable rights, is totally up to the individual.
The fact that the "idea" of the wrongness of slavery HAD to evolve over time with education (mainly through Judaism and Christianity) the "slavery paradigm" was able to be eliminated in Western Civilization.
The fact is that Western Civilization, mainly because of the prevalent Judeo-Christian philosophy (Look into history of Wilberforce, etc.)was successful in converting the majority in the West into believing that slavery was evil.
But that is according to the Constitution, which has been used as toilet paper by our elected officials and the people (mostly through ignorance and fraud by politicians) have enabled their officials to abuse the Constitution for decades.
:’)
The Lord offers the highest Law, as in any covenantial relationship the terms are fixed but performance is rarely able to be demanded.
As for “laws that go against nature” who decides “nature” and at what point are laws nullified by conscience?
That is until the 20th century when the Progressives and the courts undermined the Constitution and turned their backs on Natural Law.
Ron Paul *is* crazy.
For starters, L-Ron thinks America is supposed to turn the other cheek when attacked. This is a recipe for more Pearl Harbor events like 911.
Why do libertarians believe this? Interestingly, libertarians defend the Leninist theory of imperialism (they indeed use the Marxist talk about blowback), one of the strange curiosities of modern life.
Me personally? I’m 6’1 and am in the best shape I’ve ever been in. I also know Georgia is one of the most obese states in the Union. If your fighting skills resemble anything like the L-Ron foreign policy, you shouldn’t be running your mouth at strangers.
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.