Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Arkinsaw
DO in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will:

Do you see the words injured or oppressed? Please tell me how they were being injured or oppressed by the Federal Government.

All that clause means is that they were "declaring and making known" that the Constitution did not supersede their Natural Law right to Rebellion In the Face of Intolerable Oppression. No one ever suggested that the constitution, written by men, did supersede that right, granted by God.

222 posted on 07/09/2003 2:06:56 PM PDT by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]


To: Ditto
Do you see the words injured or oppressed? Please tell me how they were being injured or oppressed by the Federal Government.

I suppose you are talking about the South in 1860? As I have stated a few times. I am talking about the generic right of secession in the face of oppression. The specific case of whether the South was actually opressed is a whole nother debate.

All that clause means is that they were "declaring and making known" that the Constitution did not supersede their Natural Law right to Rebellion In the Face of Intolerable Oppression.

It says that they can resume the powers delegated at any time. Since the delegation of the power was a peaceful process, where you get the idea that they are referring to the opposite process of a rebel war I don't know.

No one ever suggested that the constitution, written by men, did supersede that right, granted by God.

If the text said that they had a natural right to rebel then you would be right. Instead it said that they had a right to resume the powers delegated. If you rebelled, and lost, would your right to resume the powers delegated be exercised? Uh...no. Your explanation that they were making known a right, that (in your words) nobody ever suggested was superseded, is a stretch for this text.
223 posted on 07/09/2003 2:20:30 PM PDT by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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