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

To: mudblood
Thanks for your comments

The US constitution is based on judeo-christian ideals, and french philosophy.

Well, you're half right (the first half). I suggest you read the works of James Madison on the same; also On Revolution, by Hannah Arendt. Who are you talking about, JJ Rousseau? No. And as for Deists, there may have been about a couple notable ones in the mix, and not the Adams cousins, Jefferson, Washington, or Henry. (And certainly neither were Sidney, nor Locke, who were cited by Adams and Jefferson as providing the basis for the founding of the USA.)

There's a reason why the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, rather than simply holding up the Bible as our country's highest legal document: the Constitution is for everyone and CAN BE CHANGED.

The Constitution was held up as our highest legal document, because the Constitution lays out our governance, whereas the Bible is (and was regarded as) documentation of a higher, universal, and all saturating truth.

As you've pointed out, the Constitution proscribes ways of its being changed: i.e., by processes such as that begun with yesterday's vote -- not by judges elevating themselves to be the Ruling Tribunal of America.

Once its in [T]he [Bible, it stays there, is immutable, etc. The Constitution can be amended as it becomes necessary. This last attempt at that simply didn't pass the muster.

Really? I saw a muster --well, for everyone but Kerry and Edwards. mb: at the signing of the Constitution, some rights, responsibilities, and standards were enumerated while others were regarded as self-evident and treated as implicit. One of these, clearly, was the meaning of "marriage" as being a sacred commitment between one man and one woman. You're right. That is immutable, in the Bible of those who signed the Constitution, "in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven."

502 posted on 07/15/2004 10:00:00 PM PDT by unspun (Posting thru spellcheck eliminates extra white space. | I'm not "Unspun with AnnaZ" but I appreciate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 486 | View Replies ]


To: unspun
"Thanks for your comments..."

You are welcome: likewise.

French Philosophy as in, a government run by the people, for the people, etc. No aristocracy. You can't deny that this didn't come out of the French Revolution. Perhaps not exactly "philosophy" as in "existentialism" or whatever, but it was French nonetheless.

Passing muster: by that I meant that enough legislators didn't agree with it to bring it to a vote. It didn't pass muster ENOUGH - else the vote would be going to the states. Personally, I'm beginning to think that it should have passed muster enough to go to the states, where it could be voted on and decided once and for all.


The Bible: look, there's a lot of good in the Bible, and I have a lot of respect for Christians, but there's a lot of people in the country, a lot of non-christians, a lot of different KINDS of Christians, and if we all want to get along we need to learn how to agree to disagree - as a nation. Ramming our personal beliefs down each other's throats by force of law is bad when liberals do it and just as bad when conservatives do it. That's all I'm saying about that.

Great conversation! :)
507 posted on 07/16/2004 8:22:34 AM PDT by mudblood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 502 | 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