[roberbaran]

>"As a matter of fact, it's a confirmation of the fact that we received our rights from God, as proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence," he said at a news conference in Alberta, during the Group of Eight summit.

The problem is that the Declaration of Independance isn't a law. That's the same doc that said "Life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness" while the USA was a slave country. It was a letter. It has no legally binding power.

[sirchtruth]

The problem is that the Declaration of Independance isn't a law. That's the same doc that said "Life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness" while the USA was a slave country. It was a letter. It has no legally binding power.

I will fight you to the death to uphold it's precepts!

[MEGoody]

"It was a letter. It has no legally binding power."

Hmmmm. . .that would also be true of the letter from Jefferon that is often sited re: separation of church and state. And yet, the liberals never seem to mention THAT is "only a letter."

[streetpreacher]

Come to think of it... if the Declaration of Independence doesn't have any legal force, are we technically still part of Britian? Hmmm...

[Undivided Heart]

Neither was the letter to the Danbury Baptists, but that letter is holy scripture to the "wall of separation" people. We can't have it both ways.

[Maceman]

That's the same doc that said "Life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness" while the USA was a slave country.

I love this line of reasoning. Because Jefferson owned slaves, there's no such thing as liberty? Is that your point?

Here's a challenge. Tell me why slavery is wrong, without citing the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence -- namely, that rights come from the Creator, and not from other people or governments.

The single most important political idea in the last 2 million years, and you are willing to dismiss it because Thomas Jefferson owned slaves?