The fugitive slave clause was a compromise to allow the Constitution to survive.
Slavery, however, was meant to end eventually as the Founders considered it immoral.
They had put limits on it and started it on the road to extinction.
The original draft of the Declaration blamed the King for the slaves that were in the colonies.
Dred Scott attempted to make slavery moral, which it could not, since the Declaration declared it immoral.
Now, go take your legal positivism somewhere else.
You and your positivistic legalism are a threat to liberty everywhere and represent the philosophy of Calhounism/Facism/Nazism/Communism/ as against the philosophy of the Founding Fathers based on natural law.
Perhaps because you have learned nothing.
[ftD] The fugitive slave clause was a compromise to allow the Constitution to survive.
The Fugitive Slave Clause was ratified unanimously by each and every state and was the Supreme Law of the Land. Deal with it.
[ftD] Slavery, however, was meant to end eventually as the Founders considered it immoral.
Washington and Jefferson were slave-owners to their death. The Constitution does not seem to contain the part of ending slavery. Perhaps you can quote it from the Constitution that was ratified and adopted.
[ftD] They had put limits on it and started it on the road to extinction.
They had put NO limits on slavery. It was left up to the states. The only limit in the Constitution is the prohibition of any Federal law interfering with the slave trade for 20 years, and a limit prohibiting any Federal tax exceeding ten dollars on the importation of slaves.
[ftD] The original draft of the Declaration blamed the King for the slaves that were in the colonies.
Nobody ratified the original draft of the Declaration and made it law. All the states unanimously ratified the Constitution and made IT the law.
[ftD] Dred Scott attempted to make slavery moral, which it could not, since the Declaration declared it immoral.
The Declaration is irrelevant. The CONSTITUTION is the law of the land and made slavery CONSTITUTIONAL.
[ftD] Now, go take your legal positivism somewhere else.
Now take your Claremonster B.S. somewhere else.
[ftD] You and your positivistic legalism are a threat to liberty everywhere and represent the philosophy of Calhounism/Facism/Nazism/Communism/ as against the philosophy of the Founding Fathers based on natural law.
Washington and Jefferson were slaveowners to their death. Your silly B.S. is nonsense.
We have an established legal system. If you want to call it Facist-Nazi-Communist, that is your problem, not mine.
Courts must follow the law, not your fantasies. If the law is wrong, then the law must be changed.
If you have a copy of the natural law please post it.
You can tell me all day that abortion is immoral and wrong and whatever else enters your peabrain. Abortion is legal and if you think otherwise, you are invited to go shutdown all the abortion mills.
If we follow your fantasy, who will decide which portions or the Constitution are to be followed and who will decide which ones are immoral? If not the Supreme Court, then who? The President? President Bush? President Clinton?