Members banned from this thread: katzgar


Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 456789 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 130

Thread: The Declaration of Independence

  1. #106 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Blue Ridge
    Posts
    34,158
    Thanks
    20,364
    Thanked 11,245 Times in 8,715 Posts
    Groans
    4,059
    Groaned 1,174 Times in 1,074 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domer76 View Post
    Straightforward English. No clarification needed.

    Just another stalker's tactic.
    Do you reply to stalkers' every post? LOL!

  2. #107 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    17,247
    Thanks
    846
    Thanked 4,225 Times in 2,940 Posts
    Groans
    304
    Groaned 343 Times in 329 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domer76 View Post
    lol

    Sorry, pal. I am inferring nothing. The Declaration did not say "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which we aspire for all". Not a single word about aspirations. Nor intentions. THAT'S the inference.

    Lincoln's suggestions do not make it true. As he said, "obvious untruth". It's that obvious untruth that is not so obvious to you.

    Lincoln clearly stated that that they did not mean to say that all were equal at that time or that they meant to make them so. It would ONLY have been an obvious untruth if that was their intent, but since it was not. I don't know how you read that any other way. It must require some extreme intellectual dishonesty or myopia to get from what you have.

    Jefferson certainly had some moral inconsistencies, but he was far from stupid, unaware of those inconsistencies or the unjust circumstances that many then lived under.
    Leviticus 19:33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not do him wrong. 34 The stranger that sojourneth with you shall be unto you as the homeborn among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

  3. #108 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    43,497
    Thanks
    10,918
    Thanked 11,635 Times in 8,668 Posts
    Groans
    44
    Groaned 4,558 Times in 3,891 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timshel View Post
    Lincoln clearly stated that that they did not mean to say that all were equal at that time or that they meant to make them so. It would ONLY have been an obvious untruth if that was their intent, but since it was not. I don't know how you read that any other way. It must require some extreme intellectual dishonesty or myopia to get from what you have.

    Jefferson certainly had some moral inconsistencies, but he was far from stupid, unaware of those inconsistencies or the unjust circumstances that many then lived under.
    Yep, Jefferson just failed to mention intent or aspirations or goals, didn't he?

    I read it as the words are layed out. You and old Abe are making the inferences.

  4. #109 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    17,247
    Thanks
    846
    Thanked 4,225 Times in 2,940 Posts
    Groans
    304
    Groaned 343 Times in 329 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domer76 View Post
    Yep, Jefferson just failed to mention intent or aspirations or goals, didn't he?

    I read it as the words are layed out. You and old Abe are making the inferences.

    No, you are not reading the words as they are laid out. Nowhere in the text does it say that all men are then recognized as equals in the eyes of the law. To claim that was what they had asserted is just dishonest or stupid. Why would Jefferson have put this in the first draft if he was asserting the nonsense you put into his text?

    He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian King of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he has obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed again the Liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
    Leviticus 19:33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not do him wrong. 34 The stranger that sojourneth with you shall be unto you as the homeborn among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

  5. #110 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 25 Times in 17 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdog View Post
    Yep, ... to the Socialists, it is but a slave document concocted by a bunch of low-life merchants.
    From a guy who had he lived then, with the same proclivities, would have made a good Loyalist.

  6. #111 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    22,418
    Thanks
    19,288
    Thanked 11,435 Times in 7,860 Posts
    Groans
    451
    Groaned 431 Times in 408 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jacka View Post
    From a guy who had he lived then, with the same proclivities, would have made a good Loyalist.
    Socialism is just another word ... for monarchy.
    "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."

    — Joe Biden on Obama.

    “Unidentified stormtroopers. ”

    — Nancy Pelosi on U.S. National Guardsmen and women.

    “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,”

    - Sen. Schumer, describing his fear of the IC

    Socialism is just the modern word for monarchy.

  7. #112 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 25 Times in 17 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdog View Post
    Socialism is just another word ... for monarchy.
    Posts like this are what gives "Conservative" the reputation of being just another word for....dumbhead.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to jacka For This Post:

    Frank Apisa (07-06-2018)

  9. #113 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Central New Jersey
    Posts
    17,093
    Thanks
    9,589
    Thanked 8,875 Times in 5,569 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 846 Times in 810 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jacka View Post
    Posts like this are what gives "Conservative" the reputation of being just another word for....dumbhead.
    Ain't that the truth.

  10. #114 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    22,418
    Thanks
    19,288
    Thanked 11,435 Times in 7,860 Posts
    Groans
    451
    Groaned 431 Times in 408 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jacka View Post
    Posts like this are what gives "Conservative" the reputation of being just another word for....dumbhead.
    Give us your definition of Socialism.

    "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."

    — Joe Biden on Obama.

    “Unidentified stormtroopers. ”

    — Nancy Pelosi on U.S. National Guardsmen and women.

    “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,”

    - Sen. Schumer, describing his fear of the IC

    Socialism is just the modern word for monarchy.

  11. #115 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 1,189 Times in 895 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 88 Times in 87 Posts

    Default

    I recount the following from memory over a half century old, and paraphrase.

    In grammar school my public school teacher introduced us to TJ/DOI, explaining that it's some of the most soaring political rhetoric in U.S. history.

    For decades afterward I accepted the notion.

    BUT !!

    On closer look I've grown to believe Jefferson somewhat phoned it in.
    Thomas Jefferson wrote the rough draft of the DOI; John Adams and Ben Franklin were the editors.
    Jefferson originally wrote:

    "We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable ..." Jefferson

    Franklin expresses his reservation about that phrasing to Jefferson. Franklin explained; we're founding a new country. It's not based on assertions of religion. It's based on assertions of reason. We should reflect that religious tolerance in this writing.
    source: Walter Isaacson: author of: Benjamin Franklin: An American Life
    So Jefferson applied the somewhat troll-like trick (that in JPP exchange wouldn't fool most posters here) of calling his assertions "truths". This simple rhetorical flourish spared Jefferson the inconvenience of having to explain or justify. Jefferson declared them "truths", feebly reinforced it with the "self-evident" flourish, and moved on.

    I'd have liked to believe between the three of them, they could have done better.
    "It should be obvious to anyone why conservatives and libertarians should be against Trump. He has no grounding in belief. No core philosophy. No morals. No loyalty. No curiosity. No empathy and no understanding. He demands personal loyalty and not loyalty to the nation. His only core belief is in his own superiority to everyone else. His only want is exercise more and more personal power." smb / purveyor of fact 18/03/18

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to sear For This Post:

    domer76 (07-06-2018)

  13. #116 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 25 Times in 17 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigdog View Post
    Give us your definition of Socialism.

    I don't have a definition. But the definition is an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are owned by the government, unlike, for example, the economic system in the U.S. supported by Republicans and Democrats alike.

  14. #117 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    43,497
    Thanks
    10,918
    Thanked 11,635 Times in 8,668 Posts
    Groans
    44
    Groaned 4,558 Times in 3,891 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Timshel View Post
    No, you are not reading the words as they are laid out. Nowhere in the text does it say that all men are then recognized as equals in the eyes of the law. To claim that was what they had asserted is just dishonest or stupid. Why would Jefferson have put this in the first draft if he was asserting the nonsense you put into his text?

    He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. This piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the Christian King of Great Britain. Determined to keep open a market where Men should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce. And that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on whom he has obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed again the Liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
    The Declaration is not law. Never was. Never will be. Never intended to be.

    The text says NOTHING about goals or aspirations. Note the present tense "are". "all men are created equal"..."are endowed by their Creator"..."among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

    That passage refers to King George and more of his transgressions. Nothing about aspirations of equality. In fact, I see no mention of equality in that text.

    I'm afraid you are inserting notions into the text of the Declaration, not me. I'm merely saying, just as Lincoln did, that it was an "obvious untruth" about people having the right of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". It was an "obvious untruth" then and is an "obvious untruth" today.

  15. #118 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    4,121
    Thanks
    253
    Thanked 1,189 Times in 895 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 88 Times in 87 Posts

    Default

    "The Declaration is not law." d7
    Thus the name. I've never heard anyone call it The Law of Independence.
    "I'm merely saying, just as Lincoln did, that it was an "obvious untruth" about people having the right of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". It was an "obvious untruth" then and is an "obvious untruth" today." d7
    - piffle -
    It may not be enforceable law.
    That doesn't mean it's not a right. And Jefferson was explicitly clear about that. Such rights don't come from government. Such rights come from our Creator (please note the cap). And that government's role is merely to secure these rights.
    "It should be obvious to anyone why conservatives and libertarians should be against Trump. He has no grounding in belief. No core philosophy. No morals. No loyalty. No curiosity. No empathy and no understanding. He demands personal loyalty and not loyalty to the nation. His only core belief is in his own superiority to everyone else. His only want is exercise more and more personal power." smb / purveyor of fact 18/03/18

  16. #119 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Central New Jersey
    Posts
    17,093
    Thanks
    9,589
    Thanked 8,875 Times in 5,569 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 846 Times in 810 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sear View Post
    Thus the name. I've never heard anyone call it The Law of Independence.

    - piffle -
    It may not be enforceable law.
    That doesn't mean it's not a right. And Jefferson was explicitly clear about that. Such rights don't come from government. Such rights come from our Creator (please note the cap). And that government's role is merely to secure these rights.
    Wow...everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...and those rights came from my mother and father.

    Like I said...WOW.

    They would have been so proud.

  17. #120 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    17,247
    Thanks
    846
    Thanked 4,225 Times in 2,940 Posts
    Groans
    304
    Groaned 343 Times in 329 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by domer76 View Post
    The Declaration is not law. Never was. Never will be. Never intended to be.

    The text says NOTHING about goals or aspirations. Note the present tense "are". "all men are created equal"..."are endowed by their Creator"..."among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

    That passage refers to King George and more of his transgressions. Nothing about aspirations of equality. In fact, I see no mention of equality in that text.

    I'm afraid you are inserting notions into the text of the Declaration, not me. I'm merely saying, just as Lincoln did, that it was an "obvious untruth" about people having the right of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". It was an "obvious untruth" then and is an "obvious untruth" today.

    Yes, "are" and still that clearly does not suggest that all then enjoyed equality in the eyes of the law.

    This is pointless. You don't have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge the obvious intent of the words and you dishonestly suggest that they meant something that other statements within the document clearly make impossible. Your reading of it is ignorant and petulant nonsense.
    Leviticus 19:33 And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not do him wrong. 34 The stranger that sojourneth with you shall be unto you as the homeborn among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

Similar Threads

  1. a new declaration of independence??
    By SmarterthanYou in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-11-2012, 10:18 AM
  2. If today's secessionists wrote their own Declaration of Independence.
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-15-2012, 04:32 PM
  3. Replies: 55
    Last Post: 08-29-2011, 10:45 PM
  4. Apollo 11 Customs Declaration
    By Primavera in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-07-2010, 10:24 PM
  5. DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND PHOTOS
    By TuTu Monroe in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-04-2009, 12:40 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •