The Free State Project: A Project for Idaho

Idaho Observer via Sierra Times ^ | 11/16/02 | Hari Heath

[galt-jw]

Conservatives fight against socialist changes, but once the change is make, the fight is over.

This is false. The inertia of socialism is not reversed, only retarded by conservative compromise. Conservatives at no time have actually advocated extremely limited government, as of late. They have merely "gone along with the drift, just didn't swim."

In the same way, they have compromised at each devaluation of liberty along the way.

It would help if we could list the rights we have gained and the percent of government NECESSARY we have reduced since we have placed our trust where it now lies.

[archy]

The 20,000 will likely be but the tip of the iceburg

Once they get the UFO people to join with them?

You are warned not to make unauthorized statements about our plans, Earth person. Such behaviour could result in a crastna of your perglimmis.

-archy-/-

[Feiny]

Idaho is one of places I have considered moving to before anyway. I have considered Alaska, but the whole darkness for 6 months thing would drive me to be an alcoholic.

[wimpycat]

It is correct, and you don't know what my "view" is. See, that's what you get for assuming. You don't know, because I haven't told you. You've only gotten hints, and just as with the Founding Fathers, it's dangerous to take hints and guesses and pass them off as facts. The Constitution, while not designed to be an "open" document, as you say, at the same time is not like the laws of the Medes and Persians, either. The Constitution is silent on many points. And if you bring up the 10th Amendment, as you inevitably will, you have a very different interpretation of it than I (and most every Supreme Court Justice there has ever been) do, which is probably the biggest bone of contention.

The philosphy of the Founding Fathers was by no means complete and all-encompassing. They were influenced by a number of different philosophies--Humanism & Deism among them. The Constitution may have been inspired by philosophies, but we are governed according to the Constitution...not by any one "named" or "defined" philosophy. The Constitution, in other words, is not the Word of God. It is the word of men, laying out a system of government which has never been improved upon.


Which brings us to another difference. You seem to treat the Founding Fathers as if they were prophets and this "philosophy" (of which there never was just one) as a religion. You read the Constitution the same way Pentacostals read the Bible. They were men, not deities, very human, fallible men, who, in my personal opinion, would be shocked at the people who today revere them to the point of religious worship. They were Great Men, but not objects of worship. You genuflect and make burnt offerings before them; they may dictate to you, but they only influence me. And like the Good Fathers of this country that they were, they raised us up right, gave us a good guidebook by which to govern, and sent us on our way. The rest is up to us.

Keep in mind, as I said before, the Constitution itself has given us a way to resolve these differences.

[watcher1]

It would help if we could list the rights we have gained and the percent of government NECESSARY we have reduced since we have placed our trust where it now lies.

There would be no list of rights gained. We've done nothing but loose rights for as long as I can remember.

[wimpycat]

What rights did you loose? I didn't lose any.

[archy]

... the whole darkness for 6 months thing would drive me to be an alcoholic.

That's a common reaction in Finland, too. But the pink bunnyrabbits and other critters look so cute hopping around in the snow when it's dark.

The Alaska-sized mosquitos are no great attraction, however.

-archy-/-

[Taxman]

And reimposed with the Sixteenth Amendment!

[watcher1]

What rights did you loose? I didn't lose any.

ROTFLMAO!

Keep telling yourself that

[wimpycat]

What would the Founding Fathers say if they saw your post? The Founding Fathers never confused 'loose' with 'lose'. You ought to be ashamed!

[watcher1]

If anyone should be ashamed... it's you

[wimpycat]

Considering the caliber of my critics, I'm on the right track.

[Roscoe]

She's defending slavery in the name of FREEDOM!!!

Amazing.

[nopardons]

Your playing semantical games doesn't make my statements incorrect. As a matter of fact, they strengthen my position. Thanks for proving me correct. LOL

[wimpycat]

Sharecropping and indentured servitude is like serfdom, isn't it?

[The Green Goblin]

And if you bring up the 10th Amendment, as you inevitably will, you have a very different interpretation of it than I (and most every Supreme Court Justice there has ever been) do, which is probably the biggest bone of contention.

Well then, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[wimpycat]

Cool. It's always nice to politely disagree. You notice how we didn't tear each other up?

[EBUCK]

What a cop-out. You don't even have the guts to re-state your obvious fallacy.....your weakness and dishonesty are apparent.

EBUCK