Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Non-Sequitur
You have that backwards. It was the states that were doing the accepting, not the other way around.

The ratification documents constitute the 'signature page' of the Constitution. You would apparently completely ignore any reservations contained therein. I would not.

Your approach seems to be closer to the D@mocrats' approach. Congratulations...

204 posted on 08/28/2008 4:25:46 PM PDT by Who is John Galt? ("Sometimes I have to break the law in order to meet my management objectives." - Bill Calkins, BLM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies ]


To: Who is John Galt?
The ratification documents constitute the 'signature page' of the Constitution.

The 'signature page' of the Constitution followed Article VII where men like James Madison, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Rutledge, and ben Franklin signed it. The ratification documents were just that, assent to their decision and their declaration to ratify and abide by the Constitution. Their acceptance was not conditional. It was not "we accept only if such and such is included". Any assumptions and any recommendations that they made did not alter the Constitution as ratified by the convention and which they assented to. New York declared that standing armies should not be kept. The fact that a standing army was established per the Constitution did not invalidate its ratification because the ratification documents do not trump the Constitution itself.

Your approach seems to be closer to the D@mocrats' approach. Congratulations...

I wouldn't have pegged you for a Democrat.

214 posted on 08/29/2008 8:18:54 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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