The Chicken and the Egg of American History

[BlindBoo]

Aren't you the savage who said this?

"I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies."
Liberals On Abortion

How about you get lost?

How predictably dishonest of you. Dare I say a liar, to take the last sentence in a conversation you weren't even having and twist it to your own demented end. But that's just how you roll isn't it?

Gipper said:

Abortion is legalized murder. It is far past the time it was outlawed.

I Said:

And surely you support a vast socialist/government support networks and programs to help support and raise all those unwanted children, right?

Gipper Said:

The tired old refrain of the baby killer.

In other words, you support mass murdering babies because supporting and raising them is too difficult. Are you related to Heinrich Himmler?

I said:

I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now tell me you never lie.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm going to post a thread where Libtards claim America is going to fall like the Roman Republic did.

That got me to thinking about the principals of the Declaration and the form of government our Founders established for us.

Historians talk about Greek Democracy and the Roman Republic. But, they never tell you the truth about either.

Greek democracy was never for ALL Greeks. It was only for the elite landowners and those with power. It had absolutely nothing to do with freedoms of the protection of a minority.

The same holds true with Rome. The common people had absolutely no say over the laws and regulations. The Senate was composed of powerful, wealthy men with lots of slaves to keep them rich and in power. They were a tyranny of the few and the creation of an emperor was a natural progression.

Thank God we have a form of government where EVERYBODY is protected and a majority cannot run roughshod over minorities.

I hope you'll let me know when you post it.


Now..."Thank God we have a form of government where EVERYBODY is protected and a majority cannot run roughshod over minorities."
...the point of today's thread is that our nation was unique in saving the place of, not minorities, but of individuals.

That is the meaning of the Declaration.

Sadly, the 2 century march of Progressivism/Marxism has changed that to a government that can run roughshod over individuals, and demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the great god-government.

Essentially returning the citizenry to the condition of slavery.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Aren't you the savage who said this?

"I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies."
Liberals On Abortion

How about you get lost?

How predictably dishonest of you. Dare I say a liar, to take the last sentence in a conversation you weren't even having and twist it to your own demented end. But that's just how you roll isn't it?

Gipper said:

Abortion is legalized murder. It is far past the time it was outlawed.

I Said:

And surely you support a vast socialist/government support networks and programs to help support and raise all those unwanted children, right?

Gipper Said:

The tired old refrain of the baby killer.

In other words, you support mass murdering babies because supporting and raising them is too difficult. Are you related to Heinrich Himmler?

I said:

I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now tell me you never lie.....

Good to see you attempt to dig yourself out of the hole you built for yourself.
Your embarrassment is well deserved.


Are these your words?

"I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies."


Do you vote for the party of abortion and post-birth abortion?


Please don't return.....the smell is sickening.

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. It is the single most important duty of the judiciary to understand and to impress on government, that individual rights are supreme when juxtaposed against majority wishes.

“A properly engaged judiciary is duty-bound to declare majority acts invalid when they abridge natural rights”
George Will.


Which is why Justice Kagan should never have been confirmed, nor the President who nominated her, been elected.
Kagan has written that she favors government control of speech.



“…under questioning by Sen. Tom Coburn she refused to recognize "natural rights" outside of the U.S. Constitution, presumably including those mentioned in our Declaration of Independence. The Oklahoma Republican then asked Kagan if she believes American citizens have "a fundamental right" to own firearms for self-defense, which he noted the great English jurist William Blackstone described as a "natural right." Kagan responded by saying, "To be honest with you, I don't have a view of what are natural rights independent of the Constitution."

Coburn pressed, asking Kagan if her response meant "you wouldn't embrace what the Declaration says, that we have certain God-given rights, and that among these are the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?"



That issue is this: Do we each have rights because they are granted to us by government, or because those rights exist whether government recognizes them or not? That's what the American Revolution was all about.

George III and the English Parliament said our rights were no more or less than what they granted to us. We replied in our Declaration of Independence that we each have "certain inalienable rights" that are independent of and superior to the will of our governors, thus legitimate law requires the consent of the governed.”
Kagan dodges and weaves on natural rights



If one believes that there are no rights other than what government says there are, which is the Progressive/ Democrat view.....then we are no more than the slave that Republicans had to pry away from the Democrats in an earlier time.

How can there be so many who are unaware of the choice they have????
There cannot be a more clear and evident proof of the failure of government schooling.

 

[BlindBoo]

Aren't you the savage who said this?

"I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies."
Liberals On Abortion

How about you get lost?

How predictably dishonest of you. Dare I say a liar, to take the last sentence in a conversation you weren't even having and twist it to your own demented end. But that's just how you roll isn't it?

Gipper said:

Abortion is legalized murder. It is far past the time it was outlawed.

I Said:

And surely you support a vast socialist/government support networks and programs to help support and raise all those unwanted children, right?

Gipper Said:

The tired old refrain of the baby killer.

In other words, you support mass murdering babies because supporting and raising them is too difficult. Are you related to Heinrich Himmler?

I said:

I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Now tell me you never lie.....

Good to see you attempt to dig yourself out of the hole you built for yourself.
Your embarrassment is well deserved.


Are these your words?

"I guess that's no, I don't really care about the lives of these babies."


Do you vote for the party of abortion and post-birth abortion?


Please don't return.....the smell is sickening.

That's the smell of you own dishonesty and lies Which of course is just your SOP so you're probably use to the smell by now.

 

[PoliticalChic]

11. The Declaration of Independence, the first of our memorializing documents, posits a nation that guards the rights of the individual over that of government.

The text specifies unalienable natural rights that are God-given.....not government-given.



Progressives…the Democrat Party….envisions a nation based on the writings of Rousseau, Hegel and Marx, in which government can award rights….and take them away.

There is a word for that: slavery.





12. For nearly its entire existence, the Democrat Party has stood for two doctrines:

Here's something else they never taught you.

George Fitzhugh (November 4, 1806 – July 30, 1881) was the Democrat social theorist who published racial and slavery-based sociological theories in the antebellum era.

" What society needed was slavery, not just for blacks, but for whites as well. "Slavery," "is a form, and the very best form, of socialism."

"Socialism," Proposes to do away with free competition; to afford protection and support at all times to the laboring class; to bring about, at least, a qualified community of property, and to associate labor. All these purposes, slavery fully land perfectly attains. [...] Socialism is already slavery in all save the master... Our only quarrel with Socialism is, that it will not honestly admit that it owes its recent revival to the failure of universal liberty, and is seeking to bring about slavery again in some form.”
Fitzhugh, George (1854 Sociology for the South, p. 48)




The two hallmarks of the Democrat Party......socialism, and slavery.


Southern Democrat theoretician George Fitzhugh made an interesting admission about two related desires of the Democrats: Slavery and Socialism.



And, they remain, the Democrat Party, the party of slavery and of socialism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

13. As Progressives view those natural, unalienable rights as ephemeral, given and removable by their god, government, it should come as no surprise that they believe any rights of American citizens are ….erasable.


“UCLA prof: ‘I don’t see the Second Amendment as absolute, just like I don’t see the First Amendment as absolute’

A University of California-Los Angeles professor is calling not only for gun control but also “qualifications” to freedom of speech in order to combat mass shootings fueled by racism, a phenomenon he says has only come to light since President Donald Trump’s election.

UCLA professor Douglas Kellner states that until just two years ago, “all of the previous shootings were rather divorced from sociopolitical factors,” claiming that while mass shootings occurred in the past, they were the results of “individual crises of young men,” having to do with things such as family life or school trouble, in an interview published by the university.

Kellner asserts that the phenomenon of mass shootings motivated by racist ideas is largely isolated to instances occurring since Trump’s election.

“The toxicity of gun culture has created a new factor that we have never seen before, that was a major factor in the last few shootings, and that was the election of Donald Trump, and in particular, Trump’s rhetoric [on immigrants],” Kellner said, adding “there haven’t been particular racist school shootings before, or acts of domestic terrorism.”

The professor goes on to state matter-of-factly that the El Paso shooting “was completely different from any of the other acts of domestic terrorism [or] school shootings, because it was targeting Latinos and immigrants.”
UCLA prof: ‘I don’t see the Second Amendment as absolute, just like I don’t see the First Amendment as absolute’



Would you be disposed to vote for Mao, or Stalin, if they were running?
To vote Democrat, for Progressives, one might as well be voting for Stalin or Mao, who have the very same beliefs about rights.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Tyranny works well in the United States....

*****CHUCKLE*****

 

[regent]

We had already declared our Indepence before Jefferson's document was voted on. Perhaps the real key to our independence was the
Declarations fro, The Age of Enlightenment,

 

[longknife]

I'm going to post a thread where Libtards claim America is going to fall like the Roman Republic did.

That got me to thinking about the principals of the Declaration and the form of government our Founders established for us.

Historians talk about Greek Democracy and the Roman Republic. But, they never tell you the truth about either.

Greek democracy was never for ALL Greeks. It was only for the elite landowners and those with power. It had absolutely nothing to do with freedoms of the protection of a minority.

The same holds true with Rome. The common people had absolutely no say over the laws and regulations. The Senate was composed of powerful, wealthy men with lots of slaves to keep them rich and in power. They were a tyranny of the few and the creation of an emperor was a natural progression.

Thank God we have a form of government where EVERYBODY is protected and a majority cannot run roughshod over minorities.

I hope you'll let me know when you post it.


Now..."Thank God we have a form of government where EVERYBODY is protected and a majority cannot run roughshod over minorities."
...the point of today's thread is that our nation was unique in saving the place of, not minorities, but of individuals.

That is the meaning of the Declaration.

Sadly, the 2 century march of Progressivism/Marxism has changed that to a government that can run roughshod over individuals, and demand the bending of the neck and the knee to the great god-government.

Essentially returning the citizenry to the condition of slavery.

Will America soon fall, like Ancient Rome?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It is no quirk in that the Declaration precedes the Constitution. It is of immense importance.


1.The Declaration of Independence gave birth to the nation in 1776, the Constitution was written in 1787. By itself, the Declaration did not specify any particular form of government. The only thing that makes our government legitimate is that it secures those natural rights from our Creator, and that said government continues to be regularly validated by consent of the governed.

As the first Republican President put it, government of, by, and for the people.

Government proves it is for the people as long as it secures those natural rights.




2.The great debate for America is where, exactly, the line drawn between those natural rights each individual has as their birthright, and the authority of the society to make laws that are necessary and proper to allow the nation to function.

While natural rights are affirmed by the Declaration of independence, but majority rule is the mode directed by the Constitution. It is important to recognize which came first and has priority.
The Declaration is the preface, and gives the purpose of the Constitution: to secure each American’s unalienable rights.

3.Timothy Sandefur’s The Conscience of the Constitution [states] that “American constitutional history has always hovered in the mutual resistance of two principles: the right of each individual to be free, and the power of the majority to make rules.” For Sandefur adherence to the natural rights theory of Declaration of Independence manages the tension between the two principles. Indeed, the Declaration is “more than a merely rhetorical statement.” It “sets the framework for reading our fundamental law…” “‘This Republic of Federalism:’ A Review of Timothy Sandefur’s The Conscience of the Constitution,” By Adam Tate




4. “Drawing upon biblical language, Lincoln describes the Declaration of Independence as an “apple of gold,” and the Constitution as the “frame of silver” around it. We cannot consider the Constitution independently of the purpose which it was designed to serve. The Constitution acts to guard the principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.” https://online.hillsdale.edu/document.doc?id=279


Without an understanding of the proper order of authority, meaning that the natural rights of individuals are ahead of majority rule, America fades into a tyranny of the majority.

“Freedom is the starting point of politics; government’s powers are secondary and derivative, and therefore, limited…” Sandefur, “The Conscience of the Constitution,” p.2

In Thoreau’s On the duty of Civil Disobedience, he states: “ There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all of its own power and authority are derived.”





If the history, and what makes our country truly exceptional, were to be taught in government school, would there be the necessity to have a Supreme Court even consider whether bakers could be forced to create a cake they find objectionable, or a group of nuns forced to give out birth control?

What have we become under Democrat/Progressive rule????

Progressively more Fascist

 

[PoliticalChic]

We had already declared our Indepence before Jefferson's document was voted on. Perhaps the real key to our independence was the
Declarations fro, The Age of Enlightenment,

You couldn't be more wrong.


The Enlightenment led to " the need to change human nature, and to eliminate customs and traditions, to remake established institutions, to do away with all inequalities in order to bring man closer to the state, which was the expression of the general will."
Talmon, “Origins of Totalitarian Democracy,” p. 3-7

It's embodiment was the French Revolution....not the American Revolution.

"If the French revolution was the end of monarchy and aristocratic privilege and the emergence of the common man and democratic rights, it was also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety"). This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century."
French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror




The Enlightenment and the French Revolution substituted science and reason for religion and morality.
The American revolution incorporated religion, as one can see in our memorializing documents.


Of course, FDR took his lead from the French one, not the American one.
Sad.