Um, yes: that's exactly the subject under debate. The founders were quite mistaken in that they did believe in this notion. I can prove that no actual contract was involved, though! When the Constitutional convention was over, Mrs. Powel approached Benjie Franklin and asked, "Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" In other words, she didn't even know what the new government was--and yet, inside the convention, the founders glibly spoke of a "compact" to which Mrs. Powel was supposedly a signatory.
When tpaine used the word "sign" I infer he meant: The subscription of one's name; signature.
Izzy responds:
I know he did, but he's wrong.
Contracts are created all the time with a word or a handshake. If you read up on contract law, you'll be surprised to learn that the signature is not in fact what creates a contract. A contract is made when a party makes an offer, and another party accepts the offer. A signature is optional, and does not play an integral role. Rather, the signature constitutes evidence that you accepted the offer.
--- you don't understand the actual role of signature in contracts.
--- if you understand contract law: an implied contract is an agreement which, although not explcitly stated, nevertheless exists between the two parties.
To prove that it exists, you must prove that there's an agreement between us. To prove that, you look at whatever explicit agreements we've made, and at our interactions.
--- you can't select two people at random and claim that they have an "implicit contract" between them. There must be evidence of the existence of an agreement.
-407- Shalom Israel
tpaine here:
Izzy, -- anyone could pick two people, at random, off the streets of the USA, and establish with two questions whether they have an "implicit Constitutional contract" between them.
-- The first question: -- Have you ever pledged allegiance to the flag of the USA, and to the Republic for which it stands?
The second: -- Did your pledge mean or imply that you agree with the principles of our Constitution?
The response would overwhelmingly prove that there's an agreement between most ALL of us.
Granted, a few, like you, would answer no. -- Which is fine, - rational people learn to ignore aberrations.
KrisKrinkle comments on #407:
If we can ever agree on the existence of the Social Contract (or Compact as they used to say) perhaps someday we can discuss its nature.
Izzy riposts:
Um, yes: that's exactly the subject under debate.
The founders were quite mistaken in that they did believe in this notion.
I can prove that no actual contract was involved, though!
When the Constitutional convention was over, Mrs. Powel approached Benjie Franklin and asked, "Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" In other words, she didn't even know what the new government was--and yet, inside the convention, the founders glibly spoke of a "compact" to which Mrs. Powel was supposedly a signatory.
-411-
Kris, when izzy presents definitive smash down proof like Mrs Powells words, -- what more need be said?
By which Mrs Powel verbally “signed” her agreement based on her faith in the conventioneers I guess because as you say “she didn't even know what the new government was” because of course she was outside, not inside with the convention, so she had to ask.
“…the founders glibly spoke of a "compact" to which Mrs. Powel was supposedly a signatory.”
Did they speak of it as a “compact” in any way other than the way we today might speak of a “contract” which isn’t truly a contract because it hasn’t been agreed to yet? As in: I have a contract for you to consider.
And did not the convention “…submit to the consideration of the United States in Congress assembled, that Constitution which has appeared to us the most adviseable”?