Their body of thought was also incorporated into the founders contemplations of the subject, but it is really the newer philosophers which inspired the founders in their application of theory to practice.
Locke, Wolfe, Burlamaqui, Rutherford, Puffendorf, Grotius, Rousseau, Vattel and so on were the men who inspired the founders to act regarding their ideas about natural law.
Like I asked earlier: what is the natural law(s)?
That isn't really the question. The English had their own version of "natural law" and it said perpetual allegiance was owed to the King, because the King was the chosen servant of God. There were competing versions of natural law.
The question is "Which version of natural law did the founders apply in creating the United State? "
I couldn't tell you, but I would assume it comes from some Greek/Roman/Latin words.
French. It probably started out as "CIVIS" from Latin, and evolved into Citizen.
But again, the development of the word and what it means is something else you can debate.
It is an interesting word. Blackstone uses the word a few times, and so does Shakespeare, but always referring to inhabitants of a
The Etymology says that it's usage as "inhabitant of a country" is late 14th century. Prior to that, the word meant Denizen of a City. I asked myself why that was, and tried to match up the word's emergence with events of that time. I believe I have found what appears to me to be a correlation with a particular event. city.
The word doesn't seem to be listed in any English Law dictionaries of the period, and i've looked at three different versions from the mid 1700s. It is literally not a term which is used in English law.
And that begs for the question; "Why did we change?" The normal word for the Colonists was "Subject", yet we find Jefferson erasing the word "Subject" and replacing it with the word "Citizen" when he wrote the Declaration in 1776.
Why did he use this word citizen? From what I can find out, it was not a commonly used word, at least not by English speaking peoples. They always used "Subject", because that's what they always were.
Something caused them to change the word to "citizen." Perhaps if we trace the usage of the word "citizen", we can trace their meaning behind it? We already know where the word "Subject" comes from, and the founders chose not to go that direction.
That actually reinforces my point. We do have biological and medical definitions. XX and XY. (There are some genetic abnormalities, but they're almost all still male- or female-specific.) BUT, there aren't, in many places, any legal definitions. And now we have people trying to swap 'genders', guys sneaking into female restrooms, people changing BCs, getting chopoffmydickotomies.
We don't have any legal definitions because it was never thought necessary to define "natural law" concepts such as gender. They are self-evident.
And that reinforces MY point. :)
.
.
And there isn't a legal male/female definition, and now there's a decent bit of confusion with that stuff. Should we need a legal definition for such obvious terms? No. Do we? Looking at society, we're starting to.
That would be a case of treating the symptom and not the disease. The disease is a society moving against natural law as opposed to one moving in harmony with it. This is a good point for me to interject this video. I'm trying to get people to see it because I think it's message is profound.
On a side note, male and female are not quite as vague and debatable as NBC though :p
Not yet, but like "Natural Citizen" they eventually will be, because people will have interjected nonsense in the interim.
The True Law of Free Monarchies: Or The Reciprocal and Mutual Duty Betwixt a Free King and His Natural Subjects By King James I of England - 1598 As there is not a thing so necessary to be known by the people of any land, next the knowledge of their God, as the right knowledge of their alleageance, according to the form of government established among them, especially in a Monarchy (which form of government, as resembling the Divinitie, approacheth nearest to perfection, as all the learned and wise men from the beginning have agreed upon; Unity being the perfection of all things,)⦠First then, I will set down the true grounds, whereupon I am to build, out of the Scriptures, since Monarchy is the true pattern of Divinity, as I have already said: next, from the fundamental Laws of our own Kingdom, which nearest must concern us: thirdly, from the law of Nature, by divers similitudes drawn out of the same: and will conclude syne by answering the most waighty and appearing incommodities that can be objected. By the Law of Nature the King becomes a naturall Father to all his Lieges at his Coronation... As to the other branch of this mutual and reciprocal band, is the duty and alleageance that the Lieges owe to their King: the ground whereof, I take out of the words of Samuel, cited by Gods Spirit, when God had given him commandement to heare the peoples voice in choosing and annointing them a King. And because that place of Scripture being well understood, is so pertinent for our purpose, I have insert herein the very words of the Text... ...it is plain, and evident, that this speech of Samuel to the people, was to prepare their hearts before the hand to the due obedience of that King, which God was to give unto them; and therefore opened up unto them, what might be the intollerable qualities that might fall in some of their kings, thereby preparing them to patience, not to resist to Gods ordinance: but as he would have said; Since God hath granted your importunate suit in giving you a king, as yee have else committed an error in shaking off Gods yoke, and over-hastie seeking of a King; so beware yee fall not into the next, in casting off also rashly that yoke, which God at your earnest suite hath laid upon you, how hard that ever it seem to be: For as ye could not have obtained one without the permission and ordinance of God, so may ye no more, for he be once set over you, shake him off without the same warrant. And therefore in time arm your selves with patience and humility, since he that hath the only power to make him, hath the only power to unmake him; and ye only to obey, bearing with these straits that I now foreshew you, as with the finger of God, which lieth not in you to take off.
Speech of James I before Parliament, March 21, 1610 The state of monarchy is the supremest thing upon earth, for kings are not only God's lieutenants upon earth and sit upon God's throne, but even by God himself they are called gods.
|
The Declaration of Independance When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. ...We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
|
|
England
United States
|
Kings are gods, a natural Father to all his Lieges upon his Coronation, and the duty and allegiance that the Lieges owe to their King is from the words of Samuel cited by Gods Spirit - versus - All are created equal and endowed with inalienable rights, people institute governments to secure their rights and may abolish it when they choose.
The foundational principles in England are completely alien to and incompatible with the foundational principles of the United States.