Lincoln is an example of perfect following of the Constitution

Because that's the biological designation for our species and we share common traits but we all have unique DNA that leads to unequal results.
and stupid in Biology. That is David Hume's 'bundle theory" ,just what the FOunders were fighting !!!!!
 
not-sure-hmm.gif
Then do some legwork Sonny
 
Then do some legwork Sonny
I know that Lincoln violated the 1st amendment and jailed journalists.

I've read quite a bit about The Civil War. My best friend has a 6" thick anthology about it, replete with photographs of

original texts and Mathew Brady pics.

Whoah! Where did that come from? :omg:
 
I know that Lincoln violated the 1st amendment and jailed journalists.

I've read quite a bit about The Civil War. My best friend has a 6" thick anthology about it, replete with photographs of

original texts and Mathew Brady pics.

Whoah! Where did that come from? :omg:
He never violated the First Amendment

HE gave the public speech PUBLIC that enunciated the principle

"July 1861: “Must a government of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to maintain its own existence?”"
 
He never violated the First Amendment

HE gave the public speech PUBLIC that enunciated the principle

"July 1861: “Must a government of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to maintain its own existence?”"
"Must I shoot a simple minded soldierboy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of a wiley [sic] agitator who induces him to desert? ... I think that in such a case, to silence the agitator and save the boy, is not only constitutional, but, withal, a great mercy"

HERE , HERE, BRAVO !!!!!
 
He never violated the First Amendment

HE gave the public speech PUBLIC that enunciated the principle

"July 1861: “Must a government of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to maintain its own existence?”"
That's incorrect.

Read the 1st amendment, and then know that Lincoln jailed many journalists.


 
Last edited:
Let's consider one conspicuous example of Lincoln's respect for the Constitution:

The Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law..."

AND YET, President Lincoln purported to deprive the slave-owners of the Confederacy of their human chattel property by a simple Presidential declaration.

It was all bullshit, of course. It had to be done by a Constitutional Amendment, but Lincoln did attempt to take their property with no form of due process.

"due process" is way way way overrated.
 
That's incorrect.

Read the 1st amendment, and then know that Lincoln jailed many journalists.


Soooo? Your view entails 3 things that no Founder held
1) Since we have multiple rights one right cannot be dominant
2) What is protected is what is at issue , not the 1st Amendment. So do you go for flag burning, nude dancing, etc as First Amendment issues ? Of course you , but where is the speech
3) That someone jailed is a journalist is of no importance, it is whether he was jailed wrongly for journalism. If a journalist breask into a house , he is a thief, journalist or not.

Anyway, you responed to nothing
 
Let's consider one conspicuous example of Lincoln's respect for the Constitution:

The Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law..."

AND YET, President Lincoln purported to deprive the slave-owners of the Confederacy of their human chattel property by a simple Presidential declaration.

It was all bullshit, of course. It had to be done by a Constitutional Amendment, but Lincoln did attempt to take their property with no form of due process.
Wow, what a mess...but I like tidying things....

Three erorrs in your reading of slavery in terms of the 5th Amendment, ready ?

ONE
The slave trade clause gave Congress the power to tax every slave imported into the country, to ban the slave trade in United States territory, and to prohibit American ships from participating in the trade, long before 1808. The “needful rules and regulations” clause authorized Congress to ban slavery in the territories. The “republican government” clause allowed Congress to make abolition a condition for admission to the Union. The “exclusive legislation” clause enabled Congress to abolish slavery in Washington, D.C. All of these arguments were fully rehearsed in congressional debates well before the mid-1830s, when Garrison emerged as a national abolitionist leader. In nearly every case the proslavery response was that Congress could not do those things because the Constitution protected slavery as a right of property, to which antislavery advocates responded—quite correctly—that the Constitution did not create a constitutional right of “property in man.”
TWO
Even ex-slave Frederick Douglass saw that the Constitution was just what Lincoln said,
“I say, in the way our Fathers originally left the slavery question, the institution was in the course of ultimate extinction, and the public mind rested in the belief that it was in the course of ultimate extinction,” Lincoln said in one debate with Stephen Douglas in 1858. <====== THAT"S LINCOLN
1712858271498.png
<============ THAT'S Frederick Douglass
3) IN FACT was taking the re-imbursement route but people like you wanted slavery EXTENDED, so even the slavers showed dishonesty here
"President-elect Abraham Lincoln vehemently opposed the Crittenden compromise on grounds that he opposed any policy permitting the continued expansion of slavery. Both the House of Representatives and the Senate rejected Crittenden's proposal."
3)
 
Let's consider one conspicuous example of Lincoln's respect for the Constitution:

The Fifth Amendment states, "No person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law..."

AND YET, President Lincoln purported to deprive the slave-owners of the Confederacy of their human chattel property by a simple Presidential declaration.

It was all bullshit, of course. It had to be done by a Constitutional Amendment, but Lincoln did attempt to take their property with no form of due process.
Folks, ALL FALSE and if you don't do your own research you deserve to be taken in by this lazy lying clod
 
Well, I'm a big Lincoln fan, but we really cannot say that he "perfectly followed the Constitution." He unconstitutionally pro-rogued two Northern state legislatures after voters in those states elected anti-war majorities. He shut down dozens of Northern newspapers and jailed a number of newspaper editors on highly dubious grounds. He illegally suspended the writ of habeas corpus and then tried to have civilians put on trial by military courts, a move that the Supreme Court eventually slapped down in 1866 in Ex Parte Milligan.

I give Lincoln a pass for invading Virginia because the Confederate bombardment of Fort Sumter made it impossible for him to do otherwise. Once Jefferson Davis committed the astonishing, idiotic blunder of having Fort Sumter bombarded, Lincoln had no viable, realistic choice but to resort to coercion, given the power of the Radical Republicans and the inflammation of Northern public opinion caused by the Confederate attack.
None of which speaks to Anastaplo's case FOR AL by a constitutional lawyer
 
Wow , 7 pages and not one substantive reply. Do i get a prize ?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top