Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: lentulusgracchus
Our next exercise will be your trying to tell me that the States that ratified the Constitution were not sovereign.

Not in the way you seem to think they were.

249 posted on 04/17/2005 3:09:22 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
[Me] Our next exercise will be your trying to tell me that the States that ratified the Constitution were not sovereign.

[You] Not in the way you seem to think they were.

Well, chief, since they were intact in their sovereignty under the Articles and there can be no doubt of that, then perhaps you'd better explain how, in your, Harry Jaffa's, and Lincoln the Conqueror's opinion, they were not sovereign when the Constitution was presented to them for ratification.

What you can't get around is that the bodies that sat down to deliberate ratification were the People in convention, and sovereign in every way that matters, under God and the sun.

You can't stand that, can you? And no wonder -- neither can your theory.

255 posted on 04/17/2005 8:40:07 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus ("Whatever." -- sinkspur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson