America Was Built on Natural Law

[Syriusly]

Apparently the Natural Law they believed included slavery and unequal status for women.

That too is false. Can you show anything that explicitly states that our founders did not believe in natural law?

Can you show where I said that I thought our founders did not believe in natural law?

Or maybe address my point instead- which you are so desperately avoiding.

Apparently the Natural Law the Founders believed in included slavery and unequal status for women

"...there was an expectation that on the ceasing of the importation of slaves from Africa, slavery would begin to run out. That was hoped and expected." Daniel Webster, THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION 1, March 7, 1850, (In the Senate), Page 273

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Webster7th.pdf

So the Founders- great believers in Natural Law- knew that what they did was wrong- but did it anyway- because they hoped that slavery would just go away....

Oh when was the importation of slaves made illegal?

1808- a full twenty years after the 'founders' wrote a Constitution that explicitly allowed Slavery- apparently knowing that they were 'violating Natural Law'

No. That isn't right either. They could not form the union and end slavery at the same time. So they negotiated with the southern states a date that the importation of slaves could be abolished. Then they abolished it at the earliest date allowed per the Constitution.

But you said our nation was founded on Natural Law- and that our Founders all knew natural law- you do realize that our Founders were largely Southern- right?

So our Founders- the people who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution- supposedly knew- and agreed on what Natural Law was- but also specifically passed laws that also supposedly violated Natural Law- AND ignored that supposed Natural Law themselves

Between 1/3 and 1/2 of the signors of the Constitution- i.e. the Founders- owned slaves.

Thomas Jefferson did
George Washington did

Why were they ignoring Natural Law?

 

[ding]

America Was Built on Natural Law
As our forefathers sought to build “one nation under God,” they purposely established their legal codes on the foundation of Natural Law. They believed that societies should be governed, as Jefferson put it, by “the moral law to which man has been subjected by his Creator, and of which his feelings, or conscience as it is sometimes called, are the evidence with which his Creator has furnished him. The moral duties which exist between individual and individual in a state of nature accompany them into a state of society,… their Maker not having released them from those duties on their forming themselves into a nation.” (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, 3:228)

Throughout the first century of US. history, natural law was upheld as a key principle of government by the American people and their leader, not only by Presidents and the Congress, but also by the Supreme Court.

In the view of the Court, its members were to decide cases by exercising “that understanding which Providence has bestowed upon them.” (Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1, 186-87, 1824). Since the laws they adjudicated were based on “the preexisting and higher authority of the laws of nature,” (The West River Bridge Company v. Joseph Dix, 47 U.S. 507, 532, 1848), they relied less on judicial precedent than on “eternal justice as it comes from intelligence… to guide the conscience of the Court.” (Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 39 U.S. 210, 225, 1840).

Cicero defines Natural Law as “true law.” “True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions…. It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And there will not be different laws at Rome and Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.” (The Five thousand Year Leap, p. 40)

In 1764, Massachusetts patriot James Otis defined Natural Law as “the rules of moral conduct implanted by nature in the human mind, forming the proper basis for and being superior to all written laws; the will of God revealed to man through his conscience.” (Annals of America, 2:11)

Natural Law: The Basis of Moral Government - National Center for Constitutional Studies

“The law of nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction…the moral law, called also the law of nature.” (Sir Edward Coke, Calvin’s Case in The Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke)

“…as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature...This law of nature...dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority...from this original. "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these." (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law 1723-1780)

“Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine…Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants.” (James Wilson “Of the General Principles of Law and Obligation”, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Signed U.S. Constitution)

"One nation, under God" was not written by our forefathers

It is from the Pledge of Allegiance and those words were added in the 1950s

So what? The belief that no law should be written that was not consistent with Natural Law was replaced by legal positivism in the late 19th century. Before that time that wasn't the case.

 

[ding]

That too is false. Can you show anything that explicitly states that our founders did not believe in natural law?

Can you show where I said that I thought our founders did not believe in natural law?

Or maybe address my point instead- which you are so desperately avoiding.

Apparently the Natural Law the Founders believed in included slavery and unequal status for women

"...there was an expectation that on the ceasing of the importation of slaves from Africa, slavery would begin to run out. That was hoped and expected." Daniel Webster, THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION 1, March 7, 1850, (In the Senate), Page 273

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Webster7th.pdf

So the Founders- great believers in Natural Law- knew that what they did was wrong- but did it anyway- because they hoped that slavery would just go away....

Oh when was the importation of slaves made illegal?

1808- a full twenty years after the 'founders' wrote a Constitution that explicitly allowed Slavery- apparently knowing that they were 'violating Natural Law'

No. That isn't right either. They could not form the union and end slavery at the same time. So they negotiated with the southern states a date that the importation of slaves could be abolished. Then they abolished it at the earliest date allowed per the Constitution.

But you said our nation was founded on Natural Law- and that our Founders all knew natural law- you do realize that our Founders were largely Southern- right?

So our Founders- the people who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution- supposedly knew- and agreed on what Natural Law was- but also specifically passed laws that also supposedly violated Natural Law- AND ignored that supposed Natural Law themselves

Between 1/3 and 1/2 of the signors of the Constitution- i.e. the Founders- owned slaves.

Thomas Jefferson did
George Washington did

Why were they ignoring Natural Law?

You will have to ask them, but history records they did something to end it. Unlike YOUR Democratic Party which went against their wishes and expanded slavery. A point that you are hypocritically silent on.

 

[Syriusly]

Apparently the Natural Law they believed included slavery and unequal status for women.

That too is false. Can you show anything that explicitly states that our founders did not believe in natural law?

Can you show where I said that I thought our founders did not believe in natural law?

Or maybe address my point instead- which you are so desperately avoiding.

Apparently the Natural Law the Founders believed in included slavery and unequal status for women

In 1808, Congress abolishing the slave trade at the earliest date allowed per ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution. Thus proving that the intent of ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution was to end the slave trade.

Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves - Wikipedia

Thanks for pointing out that the Founders specifically and explicitely recognized slavery in the Constitution.

They didn't. They never mentioned it by name because they did not wish to endorse it. They hated it as much as you hate them.

So as you point out-Sect. 9, Clause 1 doesn't refer to slavery or importing slaves at all

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

 

[Syriusly]

[
And don't forget that they abolished the slave trade in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.

They didn't abolish the slave trade- they prohibited the importation of new slaves- in 1808. After writing a Constitution which allowed the importation of slaves for 20 years.

IF the Founders were against slavery- why did they allow slavery in the United States?

If they were again slavery- why did they own slaves themselves?

 

[Syriusly]

Can you show where I said that I thought our founders did not believe in natural law?

Or maybe address my point instead- which you are so desperately avoiding.

Apparently the Natural Law the Founders believed in included slavery and unequal status for women

"...there was an expectation that on the ceasing of the importation of slaves from Africa, slavery would begin to run out. That was hoped and expected." Daniel Webster, THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION 1, March 7, 1850, (In the Senate), Page 273

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Webster7th.pdf

So the Founders- great believers in Natural Law- knew that what they did was wrong- but did it anyway- because they hoped that slavery would just go away....

Oh when was the importation of slaves made illegal?

1808- a full twenty years after the 'founders' wrote a Constitution that explicitly allowed Slavery- apparently knowing that they were 'violating Natural Law'

No. That isn't right either. They could not form the union and end slavery at the same time. So they negotiated with the southern states a date that the importation of slaves could be abolished. Then they abolished it at the earliest date allowed per the Constitution.

But you said our nation was founded on Natural Law- and that our Founders all knew natural law- you do realize that our Founders were largely Southern- right?

So our Founders- the people who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution- supposedly knew- and agreed on what Natural Law was- but also specifically passed laws that also supposedly violated Natural Law- AND ignored that supposed Natural Law themselves

Between 1/3 and 1/2 of the signors of the Constitution- i.e. the Founders- owned slaves.

Thomas Jefferson did
George Washington did

Why were they ignoring Natural Law?

You will have to ask them, but history records they did something to end it. Unlike YOUR Democratic Party which went against their wishes and expanded slavery. A point that you are hypocritically silent on.

So the Democratic Party- in the 1860's- reflected the values of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.

The hypocrite here is you- and only you- and here you are hypocritically trying to change the subject.

I challenged your claim that the Founders of the United States relied upon Natural laws with two specific examples which demonstrate otherwise- and you have yet to actually address any of them completely

1. Slavery- despite what was written in the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson clearly did not mean to apply that to enslaved persons. Jefferson owned slaves his entire life, and they were the bulk of his wealth. Nor did Jefferson write any laws in Virginia or promote any Federal laws to prevent slavery. The Founders never expressed any intention in the Constitution that slaves had the same rights as non-slaves. Yet you claim that Natural law is against slavery-and that the Founders based our law on Natural law. This is a clear contradiction to your claim.
2. Women- I hope you believe that women are equal under Natural law- but frankly how would I know?- since it is just whatever you decide it is. If the 'founders' thought women the legal equal of men- then why would Abigail have needed to ask her husband to remember women's rights(which of course he never did take action on)

Abigail Adams urges husband to “remember the ladies” - Mar 31, 1776 - HISTORY.com
In a letter dated March 31, 1776, Abigail Adams writes to her husband, John Adams, urging him and the other members of the Continental Congress not to forget about the nation’s women when fighting for America’s independence from Great Britain.


The future First Lady wrote in part, “I long to hear that you have declared an independency. And, by the way, in the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation.”

Nearly 150 years before the House of Representatives voted to pass the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote, Adams letter was a private first step in the fight for equal rights for women

 

[rightwinger]

America Was Built on Natural Law
As our forefathers sought to build “one nation under God,” they purposely established their legal codes on the foundation of Natural Law. They believed that societies should be governed, as Jefferson put it, by “the moral law to which man has been subjected by his Creator, and of which his feelings, or conscience as it is sometimes called, are the evidence with which his Creator has furnished him. The moral duties which exist between individual and individual in a state of nature accompany them into a state of society,… their Maker not having released them from those duties on their forming themselves into a nation.” (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, 3:228)

Throughout the first century of US. history, natural law was upheld as a key principle of government by the American people and their leader, not only by Presidents and the Congress, but also by the Supreme Court.

In the view of the Court, its members were to decide cases by exercising “that understanding which Providence has bestowed upon them.” (Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1, 186-87, 1824). Since the laws they adjudicated were based on “the preexisting and higher authority of the laws of nature,” (The West River Bridge Company v. Joseph Dix, 47 U.S. 507, 532, 1848), they relied less on judicial precedent than on “eternal justice as it comes from intelligence… to guide the conscience of the Court.” (Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 39 U.S. 210, 225, 1840).

Cicero defines Natural Law as “true law.” “True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions…. It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And there will not be different laws at Rome and Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.” (The Five thousand Year Leap, p. 40)

In 1764, Massachusetts patriot James Otis defined Natural Law as “the rules of moral conduct implanted by nature in the human mind, forming the proper basis for and being superior to all written laws; the will of God revealed to man through his conscience.” (Annals of America, 2:11)

Natural Law: The Basis of Moral Government - National Center for Constitutional Studies

“The law of nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction…the moral law, called also the law of nature.” (Sir Edward Coke, Calvin’s Case in The Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke)

“…as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature...This law of nature...dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority...from this original. "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these." (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law 1723-1780)

“Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine…Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants.” (James Wilson “Of the General Principles of Law and Obligation”, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Signed U.S. Constitution)

"One nation, under God" was not written by our forefathers

It is from the Pledge of Allegiance and those words were added in the 1950s

So what? The belief that no law should be written that was not consistent with Natural Law was replaced by legal positivism in the late 19th century. Before that time that wasn't the case.

Natural Law like stoning for adultery?

 

[JakeStarkey]

In the way you define it, the founders did not think of it that way.

You have to make the connection rather than assert it.

You have failed to do so.

Can you show anything that explicitly states that our founders did not believe in natural law?

You have to show the connection, I don't have to rebut it until you do. (Which you can't.)

If you are saying Natural Law is Divine Order created by Deity, Jefferson would say "sure, probably a deistic type of God whom we can't comprehend." Show me slavish adoration to an Evangelical-style Jesus by the Founders. Hint: does not exist.

 

[JakeStarkey]

RW and Syriusly have you against the rhetorical wall, and those bad boyz are stoning you, dingle.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Gots an idea, bro!

Define "Natural Law" and "Divine Law' with definitions accepted by a reasonable man standard.

Next show specific examples where Thomas or George of Jumping Jimmy say, "I believe in Divine Law" and "I believe in an evangelical Jesus."

We are waiting.

 

[rightwinger]

Sharia is built on Natural Law

Allah knows best

 

[ding]

That too is false. Can you show anything that explicitly states that our founders did not believe in natural law?

Can you show where I said that I thought our founders did not believe in natural law?

Or maybe address my point instead- which you are so desperately avoiding.

Apparently the Natural Law the Founders believed in included slavery and unequal status for women

In 1808, Congress abolishing the slave trade at the earliest date allowed per ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution. Thus proving that the intent of ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution was to end the slave trade.

Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves - Wikipedia

Thanks for pointing out that the Founders specifically and explicitely recognized slavery in the Constitution.

They didn't. They never mentioned it by name because they did not wish to endorse it. They hated it as much as you hate them.

So as you point out-Sect. 9, Clause 1 doesn't refer to slavery or importing slaves at all

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

You are being quite obtuse. You have been shown testimony that the founders believed that slavery was against the law of nature and you have been shown proof that the founders took action to end slavery. Your only argument is that SOME of them owned slaves. They all didn't own slaves. Many were active abolitionists.

 

[ding]

That too is false. Can you show anything that explicitly states that our founders did not believe in natural law?

Can you show where I said that I thought our founders did not believe in natural law?

Or maybe address my point instead- which you are so desperately avoiding.

Apparently the Natural Law the Founders believed in included slavery and unequal status for women

"...there was an expectation that on the ceasing of the importation of slaves from Africa, slavery would begin to run out. That was hoped and expected." Daniel Webster, THE CONSTITUTION AND THE UNION 1, March 7, 1850, (In the Senate), Page 273

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Webster7th.pdf

So the Founders- great believers in Natural Law- knew that what they did was wrong- but did it anyway- because they hoped that slavery would just go away....

Oh when was the importation of slaves made illegal?

1808- a full twenty years after the 'founders' wrote a Constitution that explicitly allowed Slavery- apparently knowing that they were 'violating Natural Law'

No. That isn't right either. They could not form the union and end slavery at the same time. So they negotiated with the southern states a date that the importation of slaves could be abolished. Then they abolished it at the earliest date allowed per the Constitution.

But you said our nation was founded on Natural Law- and that our Founders all knew natural law- you do realize that our Founders were largely Southern- right?

So our Founders- the people who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution- supposedly knew- and agreed on what Natural Law was- but also specifically passed laws that also supposedly violated Natural Law- AND ignored that supposed Natural Law themselves

Between 1/3 and 1/2 of the signors of the Constitution- i.e. the Founders- owned slaves.

Thomas Jefferson did
George Washington did

Why were they ignoring Natural Law?

Yes, they were. Just as you ignore the fact that you contribute to AGW while driving your car and having a carbon footprint. Just like you justify your support for ending the lives of innocent human beings for selfish purposes. Just like you are hypocritical for ignoring the 150 year history of slavery, racism and segregation of the Democratic Party.

 

[rightwinger]

Can you show where I said that I thought our founders did not believe in natural law?

Or maybe address my point instead- which you are so desperately avoiding.

Apparently the Natural Law the Founders believed in included slavery and unequal status for women

In 1808, Congress abolishing the slave trade at the earliest date allowed per ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution. Thus proving that the intent of ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution was to end the slave trade.

Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves - Wikipedia

Thanks for pointing out that the Founders specifically and explicitely recognized slavery in the Constitution.

They didn't. They never mentioned it by name because they did not wish to endorse it. They hated it as much as you hate them.

So as you point out-Sect. 9, Clause 1 doesn't refer to slavery or importing slaves at all

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

You are being quite obtuse. You have been shown testimony that the founders believed that slavery was against the law of nature and you have been shown proof that the founders took action to end slavery. Your only argument is that SOME of them owned slaves. They all didn't own slaves. Many were active abolitionists.

Evidently not....they codified slavery
Ending importation of slaves is not ending it when you still have four million enslaved in this country

 

[ding]

America Was Built on Natural Law
As our forefathers sought to build “one nation under God,” they purposely established their legal codes on the foundation of Natural Law. They believed that societies should be governed, as Jefferson put it, by “the moral law to which man has been subjected by his Creator, and of which his feelings, or conscience as it is sometimes called, are the evidence with which his Creator has furnished him. The moral duties which exist between individual and individual in a state of nature accompany them into a state of society,… their Maker not having released them from those duties on their forming themselves into a nation.” (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, 3:228)

Throughout the first century of US. history, natural law was upheld as a key principle of government by the American people and their leader, not only by Presidents and the Congress, but also by the Supreme Court.

In the view of the Court, its members were to decide cases by exercising “that understanding which Providence has bestowed upon them.” (Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1, 186-87, 1824). Since the laws they adjudicated were based on “the preexisting and higher authority of the laws of nature,” (The West River Bridge Company v. Joseph Dix, 47 U.S. 507, 532, 1848), they relied less on judicial precedent than on “eternal justice as it comes from intelligence… to guide the conscience of the Court.” (Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 39 U.S. 210, 225, 1840).

Cicero defines Natural Law as “true law.” “True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions…. It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And there will not be different laws at Rome and Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.” (The Five thousand Year Leap, p. 40)

In 1764, Massachusetts patriot James Otis defined Natural Law as “the rules of moral conduct implanted by nature in the human mind, forming the proper basis for and being superior to all written laws; the will of God revealed to man through his conscience.” (Annals of America, 2:11)

Natural Law: The Basis of Moral Government - National Center for Constitutional Studies

“The law of nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction…the moral law, called also the law of nature.” (Sir Edward Coke, Calvin’s Case in The Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke)

“…as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature...This law of nature...dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority...from this original. "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these." (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law 1723-1780)

“Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine…Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants.” (James Wilson “Of the General Principles of Law and Obligation”, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Signed U.S. Constitution)

"One nation, under God" was not written by our forefathers

It is from the Pledge of Allegiance and those words were added in the 1950s

So what? The belief that no law should be written that was not consistent with Natural Law was replaced by legal positivism in the late 19th century. Before that time that wasn't the case.

Natural Law like stoning for adultery?

No. Not like that.

 

[ding]

And don't forget that they abolished the slave trade in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.

They didn't abolish the slave trade- they prohibited the importation of new slaves- in 1808. After writing a Constitution which allowed the importation of slaves for 20 years.

IF the Founders were against slavery- why did they allow slavery in the United States?

If they were again slavery- why did they own slaves themselves?

Because they were not able to form a better union any other way, but they did take actions to end slavery. Why do you still drive a car when you believe in global warming?

 

[ding]

In 1808, Congress abolishing the slave trade at the earliest date allowed per ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution. Thus proving that the intent of ARTICLE I, SECTION 9, CLAUSE 1 of the Constitution was to end the slave trade.

Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves - Wikipedia

Thanks for pointing out that the Founders specifically and explicitely recognized slavery in the Constitution.

They didn't. They never mentioned it by name because they did not wish to endorse it. They hated it as much as you hate them.

So as you point out-Sect. 9, Clause 1 doesn't refer to slavery or importing slaves at all

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

You are being quite obtuse. You have been shown testimony that the founders believed that slavery was against the law of nature and you have been shown proof that the founders took action to end slavery. Your only argument is that SOME of them owned slaves. They all didn't own slaves. Many were active abolitionists.

Evidently not....they codified slavery
Ending importation of slaves is not ending it when you still have four million enslaved in this country

In 1789, following the ratification of the Constitution, Congress expanded its fight to end slavery by passing the Northwest Ordinance. That law - establishing how territories could become States in the new United States - forbade slavery in any federal territories then held; and for this reason, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin all eventually came into the nation as free States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Ordinance

And don't forget that they abolished the slave trade in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.

 

[rightwinger]

America Was Built on Natural Law
As our forefathers sought to build “one nation under God,” they purposely established their legal codes on the foundation of Natural Law. They believed that societies should be governed, as Jefferson put it, by “the moral law to which man has been subjected by his Creator, and of which his feelings, or conscience as it is sometimes called, are the evidence with which his Creator has furnished him. The moral duties which exist between individual and individual in a state of nature accompany them into a state of society,… their Maker not having released them from those duties on their forming themselves into a nation.” (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, 3:228)

Throughout the first century of US. history, natural law was upheld as a key principle of government by the American people and their leader, not only by Presidents and the Congress, but also by the Supreme Court.

In the view of the Court, its members were to decide cases by exercising “that understanding which Providence has bestowed upon them.” (Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1, 186-87, 1824). Since the laws they adjudicated were based on “the preexisting and higher authority of the laws of nature,” (The West River Bridge Company v. Joseph Dix, 47 U.S. 507, 532, 1848), they relied less on judicial precedent than on “eternal justice as it comes from intelligence… to guide the conscience of the Court.” (Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 39 U.S. 210, 225, 1840).

Cicero defines Natural Law as “true law.” “True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions…. It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And there will not be different laws at Rome and Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.” (The Five thousand Year Leap, p. 40)

In 1764, Massachusetts patriot James Otis defined Natural Law as “the rules of moral conduct implanted by nature in the human mind, forming the proper basis for and being superior to all written laws; the will of God revealed to man through his conscience.” (Annals of America, 2:11)

Natural Law: The Basis of Moral Government - National Center for Constitutional Studies

“The law of nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction…the moral law, called also the law of nature.” (Sir Edward Coke, Calvin’s Case in The Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke)

“…as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature...This law of nature...dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority...from this original. "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these." (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law 1723-1780)

“Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine…Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants.” (James Wilson “Of the General Principles of Law and Obligation”, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Signed U.S. Constitution)

"One nation, under God" was not written by our forefathers

It is from the Pledge of Allegiance and those words were added in the 1950s

So what? The belief that no law should be written that was not consistent with Natural Law was replaced by legal positivism in the late 19th century. Before that time that wasn't the case.

Natural Law like stoning for adultery?

No. Not like that.

Natural Law like Sharia Law

 

[ding]

Gots an idea, bro!

Define "Natural Law" and "Divine Law' with definitions accepted by a reasonable man standard.

Next show specific examples where Thomas or George of Jumping Jimmy say, "I believe in Divine Law" and "I believe in an evangelical Jesus."

We are waiting.

Read the OP. It's there, brother.

 

[ding]

America Was Built on Natural Law
As our forefathers sought to build “one nation under God,” they purposely established their legal codes on the foundation of Natural Law. They believed that societies should be governed, as Jefferson put it, by “the moral law to which man has been subjected by his Creator, and of which his feelings, or conscience as it is sometimes called, are the evidence with which his Creator has furnished him. The moral duties which exist between individual and individual in a state of nature accompany them into a state of society,… their Maker not having released them from those duties on their forming themselves into a nation.” (Writings of Thomas Jefferson, 3:228)

Throughout the first century of US. history, natural law was upheld as a key principle of government by the American people and their leader, not only by Presidents and the Congress, but also by the Supreme Court.

In the view of the Court, its members were to decide cases by exercising “that understanding which Providence has bestowed upon them.” (Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1, 186-87, 1824). Since the laws they adjudicated were based on “the preexisting and higher authority of the laws of nature,” (The West River Bridge Company v. Joseph Dix, 47 U.S. 507, 532, 1848), they relied less on judicial precedent than on “eternal justice as it comes from intelligence… to guide the conscience of the Court.” (Rhode Island v. Massachusetts, 39 U.S. 210, 225, 1840).

Cicero defines Natural Law as “true law.” “True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions…. It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it. And there will not be different laws at Rome and Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge. Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature, and by reason of this very fact he will suffer the worst punishment.” (The Five thousand Year Leap, p. 40)

In 1764, Massachusetts patriot James Otis defined Natural Law as “the rules of moral conduct implanted by nature in the human mind, forming the proper basis for and being superior to all written laws; the will of God revealed to man through his conscience.” (Annals of America, 2:11)

Natural Law: The Basis of Moral Government - National Center for Constitutional Studies

“The law of nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction…the moral law, called also the law of nature.” (Sir Edward Coke, Calvin’s Case in The Selected Writings and Speeches of Sir Edward Coke)

“…as man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is necessary that he should, in all points, conform to his Maker's will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature...This law of nature...dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all their force, and all their authority...from this original. "Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation, depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered to contradict these." (William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law 1723-1780)

“Human law must rest its authority ultimately upon the authority of that law which is Divine…Far from being rivals or enemies, religion and law are twin sisters, friends, and mutual assistants.” (James Wilson “Of the General Principles of Law and Obligation”, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Signed U.S. Constitution)

"One nation, under God" was not written by our forefathers

It is from the Pledge of Allegiance and those words were added in the 1950s

So what? The belief that no law should be written that was not consistent with Natural Law was replaced by legal positivism in the late 19th century. Before that time that wasn't the case.

Natural Law like stoning for adultery?

No. Not like that.

Natural Law like Sharia Law

Do you believe that is the highest possible standard? I don't.