To: Jeremydmccann
Pretty much the same old same old Southern Apologia mixed in with someone yet again having to amusingly dance around the fact there's hardly a mention of Christianity or Religion in the actual body of the Constitution, thus forcing him to rely on the Declaration of Independence.
To: Jeremydmccann
Yes, some people are still trying to refight the Civil War.
But would a separated Northern United States and Southern Confederacy have been a match for Hitler and Japanese imperialism, or the Soviet Union, or the radical Islamic terrorists?
Whether these grumblers from the grave of our old Republic of Republics like it or not, it may have been God's will that our country evolved as it did.
3 posted on
11/26/2005 10:54:23 PM PST by
patriciaruth
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1346573/posts)
To: Jeremydmccann
5 posted on
11/26/2005 11:13:48 PM PST by
traviskicks
(http://www.neoperspectives.com/french_riots.htm)
To: Jeremydmccann
I've seen this clown before and discussed another of his articles
on this thread. As I have said, this guy does not write like a legitimate lawyer, and he certainly does not argue like one. The "Esq." after his name carries zero credibility with me. (The foregoing is all besides the fact that this guy is completely nuts in the first place!)
To: Jeremydmccann
I didn't think to notice until just now, but you were the one to post the earlier article to which I referred in my #8. Are you a particular fan of Mr. Whiteman?
To: Jeremydmccann
Southern denial and revisionism.
15 posted on
11/27/2005 3:10:32 AM PST by
tkathy
(Ban the headscarf. (All religious headdress). The effect will creat a huge domino effect..)
To: Jeremydmccann
The malcontents of the world continue to pick away at the greatest nation on earth. Yes, it's Sour Grapes.
17 posted on
11/27/2005 4:53:41 AM PST by
RoadTest
(Excellent speech becometh not a fool: much less do lying lips a prince. - Prov. 17:7)
To: Jeremydmccann
Lincoln was a hero to Karl Marx.
23 posted on
11/27/2005 5:49:57 AM PST by
cynicom
To: Jeremydmccann
Interesting drivel.
The Declaration, according to him does not address individuals' right to equality, but only the right of "peoples" to be equal to other "peoples."
Thus pretty much denying the entire American philosophy of individualism. The "people" of each state apparently have the right to oppress individuals in any way they see fit, as indeed they did in the Confederacy he admires.
29 posted on
12/02/2005 1:27:32 PM PST by
Restorer
(They want to die. We want to kill them.)
To: Jeremydmccann
Second, who holds these truths to be self-evident? "We." The Declaration was not a document for individuals it was written in the plural. "All men" does not mean "Each individual man." "The People" does not mean "Each and Every Person." Singular pronouns existed in 1776 if the Founders intended by the Declaration to make a profession of the belief in individual equality and rights, they would have written the document in the singular. But they did not. Rather, the document was offered by the several united States as a declaration to the King. The States are the "We," as represented by their duly elected ambassadors, not the group of individual signors. What an imbecilic statement. If the Founders had intended the collectivistic meaning he ascribes to them, they would have written "All nations are created equal", not "All men are created equal".
Certainly, the notion that the Founders would have been so ignorant of grammar as to use the singular "All man is created equal" is preposterous.
30 posted on
12/02/2005 1:38:53 PM PST by
steve-b
(A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
To: Jeremydmccann; stainlessbanner; stand watie; sheltonmac
the Union was born in 1776. This is historical fallacy at best, and fraud at worst. In 1776, not one Union, but Thirteen separate States were created out of the formerly Thirteen English colonies. United, lower case in the document, the States combined their efforts to separate from England, and the Crown did eventually recognise the independence of each separate State. The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783 was not between the King and The United States, as a singular proper noun, rather it was between the King and the said United States, plural, naming each of the Thirteen states making it abundantly clear that the King did not view the various States as a nation, and neither did they. The several states, united, had, under Gods Providence, through war, achieved the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Natures God entitles them.Bump
32 posted on
12/02/2005 1:41:53 PM PST by
billbears
(Deo Vindice)
To: Jeremydmccann
my take on lincoln, the TYRANT & arch-WAR CRIMINAL is that he was BOTH.
92 of my relatives dies NEEDLESSLY at the hands of the DY army, just because they were:
1 UNarmed, 2.women,elderly men & children AND
3. simply because they were NOT white people.
free dixie,sw
41 posted on
12/02/2005 2:33:18 PM PST by
stand watie
(Being a DAMNyankee is no better than being a RACIST. DYism is a LEARNED prejudice against dixie.)
To: Jeremydmccann
The War of Northern Aggression!!
To: WhiskeyPapa
61 posted on
12/03/2005 8:40:55 AM PST by
Paul Ross
(My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple...It is this, 'We win and they lose.')
It's neither interesting, nor controversial, merely stupid.
78 posted on
12/09/2005 11:37:51 AM PST by
SunkenCiv
(Down with Dhimmicrats! I last updated my FR profile on Wednesday, November 2, 2005.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson