That explains a lot. Thanks.Actually, it doesn't--but I'm sure it tempts you to draw all sorts of unwarranted conclusions. What else is new?
Your parents made it for you. -- and theirs for them, back to the founders.
I can't sign a contract for you. You can't sign one for me. I can't sign one for my parents, and they can't sign one for me. That's how contracts work. You are proving my point: the "social contract," if there is such a thing, is most certainly not a contract.
Apples & oranges. Our Constitution is a detailed social contract; mongoose 'social arrangements' have no similarities.
On the contrary, the Constitution is hardly the first "social contract"; in fact Thomas Hobbes died more than a century before the Constitution was written. His "social contracts" include tribal arrangements of the sort formed by stone-age man... which are exactly analogous to mongoose social arrangements.
Gerbils? Good lord izzy. Get a grip.
The earliest known placental mammal lived 75 million years ago, and resembled a shrew. Here's an artist's reconstruction from fossil evidence:
That creature undoubtedly had social groupings, given that it gave birth to live babies that it then nursed. So not only did man have social groupings; so did our earliest mammalian ancestor, which as I've remarked resembled a gerbil. That's not the earliest example, however: evidence from dinosaur tracks suggests that they also had social groupings, which in turn suggests that a common ancestor of dinosaurs and mammals also had social groupings. So social contracts predate man even in his "gerbil" phase, back when he was an amphibious amniote some 350 million years ago.
So social contracts predate man even in his "gerbil" phase, back when he was an amphibious amniote some 350 million years ago.In case you're curious, here's an example of such an ancestor, the cotylosaurs. A cotylosaur skeleton may be seen here.
The cotylosaur family branched two ways: the therapsids, which led to the mammals; and the archosaurs, which led to the dinosaurs. This divergence may have been as recently as 250 million years ago, but what's a few million years between family?
Ever served on a jury? Voted? If so, you've exercised some of the duties of citizenship.
It happens that, as part of my church's beliefs, I have never done either of those things. I'm also a conscientious objector.
That explains a lot. Thanks.
Actually, it doesn't--but I'm sure it tempts you to draw all sorts of unwarranted conclusions. What else is new?
Your background was new to me, and explains where you are coming from. Sorry bout that, but now I understand a lot more about your attitudes on this thread.
Your parents made 'it' [a decision to raise you in this country] for you. -- and theirs for them, back to the founders.
I can't sign a contract for you. You can't sign one for me. I can't sign one for my parents, and they can't sign one for me. That's how contracts work.
Our Constiututions contract doesn't need signing. -- You live here, -- you support our rule of constitutional law. -- You don't like constitutional law in a free republic? - Tough. You are free to leave. You are not free to ignore the rights of your peers, however. They can keep a gun in their trunk.
You are proving my point: the "social contract," if there is such a thing, is most certainly not a contract.
Dream on of apples & oranges.
Our Constitution is a detailed social contract; mongoose 'social arrangements' have no similarities.
On the contrary, the Constitution is hardly the first "social contract";
-- Who said it was the first? -- Social contracts are part of the history of mankind.
in fact Thomas Hobbes died more than a century before the Constitution was written.
So what? You have a really hang up about Hobbes, even though no one here is defending him. Weird obsession.
His "social contracts" include tribal arrangements of the sort formed by stone-age man... which are exactly analogous to mongoose social arrangements.
Sigh. -- OK -- Sure thing izzy. Mongoose = Hobbes.. - Whatever you say.
But Gerbils? Good lord izzy. Get a grip.
The earliest known placental mammal lived 75 million years ago, and resembled a shrew. Here's an artist's reconstruction from fossil evidence: That creature undoubtedly had social groupings, given that it gave birth to live babies that it then nursed. So not only did man have social groupings; so did our earliest mammalian ancestor, which as I've remarked resembled a gerbil. That's not the earliest example, however: evidence from dinosaur tracks suggests that they also had social groupings, which in turn suggests that a common ancestor of dinosaurs and mammals also had social groupings. So social contracts predate man even in his "gerbil" phase, back when he was an amphibious amniote some 350 million years ago.
Stark raving..
