It's an "Act", not a part of our Founding Charter, or of the Declaration of Independence, or the Federalist Papers, or the individual writings of the Founders, nor of Thomas Paine, or of anyone who spoke to our people's cause of freedom in that day.
In other words, it's not a part of our nation's Founding Principles. It's a statute law. Apparently one of the first in a long line of usurpations of Americans' individual, inalienable rights.
Now, you've brought up mentions of the militia in nearly every reply, which has given me the impression that you're a militia member, or you're some sort of advocate. That's fine, but here's the thing about a citizen militia - it needs to be a man's free choice to stand and serve in one - not a government mandate.
Men who are forced to serve in a military capacity are conscripts, not free men. They do not serve for a higher good and purpose - they serve because they have no choice.
Let free men make their own choice to form military units for their own protection against foreign OR domestic threats. Do not put them under the overarching rule of a government, which just may be the power they should stand against.
And while we're at it, let's not confuse this with our nation's Armed Forces.
>Now, you’ve brought up mentions of the militia in nearly every reply, which has given me the impression that you’re a militia member, or you’re some sort of advocate.
>And while we’re at it, let’s not confuse this with our nation’s Armed Forces.
I’ve been all of these.
>It’s an “Act”, not a part of our Founding Charter, or of the Declaration of Independence, or the Federalist Papers, or the individual writings of the Founders, nor of Thomas Paine, or of anyone who spoke to our people’s cause of freedom in that day.
But it is directly related, through Art 1 Sec 8; and also I wouldn’t be surprised if the SECOND Congress DID contain some of the signatories of the Constitution.
>In other words, it’s not a part of our nation’s Founding Principles.
But the post that I gave, regarding my State’s Militia, apparently *IS* part of its founding principles. (No such annotation is given for an amendment.)
You have argued that the a state/governmental requirement is antithetical to a Constitutional-based society; I have given, from my own state, contrary proof (as it is impossible for a portion of the Constitution to be unconstitutional).
Now, as to the supposition that this is antithetical to the overall United States Constitution I direct your attention to the 9th and 10th Amendments which state that powers not explicitly given to the federal government are retained by either the state or the people; and it is the state and/or the people that instituted the requirement/definition of the militia.
Please state how that is contrary to the founding principals; which to quote in part: “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.” {Simply because you do not agree with *HOW* the people, or past generations, organized its powers does not mean that it is “unconstitutional” or contra-constitutional.}