The Right to Pursue Your Own Constitution

[ihopehefails]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

 

[rightwinger]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

 

[C-101]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

That's not unexpected, seeing how your political philosophy lends itself to believe that there is no authority greater than government.

 

[rightwinger]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

That's not unexpected, seeing how your political philosophy lends itself to believe that there is no authority greater than government.

Why there is always God isn't there?

 

[ihopehefails]

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

That's not unexpected, seeing how your political philosophy lends itself to believe that there is no authority greater than government.

Why there is always God isn't there?

Isn't it interesting whenever we talking about the authority of government liberals always compare it to a deity of some kind.

 

[Bill O'Olberman]

The idea of the Social Contract Theory is that rational minds come together and give up some freedom in order to form a government that protects the rights of those people and have social order maintained. If peoples consciences were their own constitutions then they would be living in the State of Nature where it has been argued that life is inconvienced or that life is "nasty, brutish, and short" and a "war of all against all." From Hobbes, to Locke, to Rousseau this is one of the founding pillars of classical liberalism and republicanism.

 

[VaYank5150]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

Thanks, rightwinger....I was afraid I was the only one...

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

So you are saying the government can't use the constition to create laws controlling the behavior of any entity other than the federal government?

I think we are all having a little trouble comprehending what you are specifically getting at.....try saying it another way or elaborating a little for us.

 

[VaYank5150]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

So you are saying the government can't use the constition to create laws controlling the behavior of any entity other than the federal government?

I think we are all having a little trouble comprehending what you are specifically getting at.....try saying it another way or elaborating a little for us.

Pssssstttt......this should be rich. What you are asking, is a little tough to do when the OP didn't write the first message...

 

[amrchaos]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

So you are saying the government can't use the constition to create laws controlling the behavior of any entity other than the federal government?

I think we are all having a little trouble comprehending what you are specifically getting at.....try saying it another way or elaborating a little for us.

Pssssstttt......this should be rich. What you are asking, is a little tough to do when the OP didn't write the first message...

Hey Va

Why do you lefties want Palin to run for President in 2012

 

[ihopehefails]

The idea of the Social Contract Theory is that rational minds come together and give up some freedom in order to form a government that protects the rights of those people and have social order maintained. If peoples consciences were their own constitutions then they would be living in the State of Nature where it has been argued that life is inconvienced or that life is "nasty, brutish, and short" and a "war of all against all." From Hobbes, to Locke, to Rousseau this is one of the founding pillars of classical liberalism and republicanism.

I really don't understand what you are saying. You say that in order to protect our rights we have to give them up?

 

[ihopehefails]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

So you are saying the government can't use the constition to create laws controlling the behavior of any entity other than the federal government?

I think we are all having a little trouble comprehending what you are specifically getting at.....try saying it another way or elaborating a little for us.

Yes because what the government does in terms of war, taxes, and anything else is governed by the its constitution and because government's nature is to control people then it can do so by whatever constitution governs it. People have their own constitution that governs what they will do in their own life and every entities's "conscience" whether it be government or person will be different. This puts each one of those in conflict but so what. Isn't this normal for all human relationships where two opposing sides will conflict with each other because each side wants two different things.

To say that our conscience/constitution is the same as everyone else's is saying that their is no unique personalities within society.

 

[rightwinger]

Day two......

It is obvious nobody knows what the hell you are ranting about

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

So you are saying the government can't use the constition to create laws controlling the behavior of any entity other than the federal government?

I think we are all having a little trouble comprehending what you are specifically getting at.....try saying it another way or elaborating a little for us.

Yes because what the government does in terms of war, taxes, and anything else is governed by the its constitution and because government's nature is to control people then it can do so by whatever constitution governs it. People have their own constitution that governs what they will do in their own life and every entities's "conscience" whether it be government or person will be different. This puts each one of those in conflict but so what. Isn't this normal for all human relationships where two opposing sides will conflict with each other because each side wants two different things.

To say that our conscience/constitution is the same as everyone else's is saying that their is no unique personalities within society.

You are basically saying(if I understand you correctly) that the Constitution of the United States is null and void, seeing how each one of us (according to you) has our own personal "constitution" within us. And we can determine in ourselves, to ignore the Constitution of the United States, and create whatever personal utopia we wish.

In regards to you asserting we all have our own personal "constitution," I disagree agree. Each one of us has an inner moral compass that we live our lives by. Said compass should work injunction with the Constitution of the United States. The former is not actual law whereas the latter is the supreme law of the land.

Your assertion in a nutshell, is a call to anarchy. It is a recipe for personal and governmental disaster in this Republic. As such, I do not agree with you. In my opinion, your "philosophy" (if you want to call it such) is ignorant and dangerous.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

IN a hyphenated word, self-determination.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

That's not unexpected, seeing how your political philosophy lends itself to believe that there is no authority greater than government.

Why there is always God isn't there?

Is there? *awaits evidence supporting your implication*

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Your freedoms exist within in your own ability to execute them and the authority to do those things comes from yourself and not from the constitution. A person's conscience is their own "constitution" that determines the actions that that person can do so the authority over one self is oneself.

The government's conscience is the constitution that determines the actions that it can do and just like a person's conscience is not an authority over another the constitution is not an authority over anything but the government. This makes each person separate from each other and the state leaving each entity to pursue their own "constitution" as they see fit.

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

Thanks, rightwinger....I was afraid I was the only one...

(S) arging the self-determination of the Founding Fathers, possibly hoping someone compares these principles to the worship by the right-wing of the State as some metaphysical authority and the manner in which the Right glorifies the Law.

 

[2Parties]

The idea of the Social Contract Theory is that rational minds come together and give up some freedom in order to form a government that protects the rights of those people and have social order maintained. If peoples consciences were their own constitutions then they would be living in the State of Nature where it has been argued that life is inconvienced or that life is "nasty, brutish, and short" and a "war of all against all." From Hobbes, to Locke, to Rousseau this is one of the founding pillars of classical liberalism and republicanism.

The goal of social contract theory is to eliminate the "free riders" and to protect the rights of all individuals. The problem is that government itself is a "free rider" and, by it's very nature, must violate the rights of individuals. This theory is clearly faulty.

Life is good and the opposite as Hobbes described it not because of social contracts but in spite of them.

The belief and support in this faulty theory has misguided many people...

 

[ihopehefails]

I don't have a clue about what point you are trying to make

Thanks, rightwinger....I was afraid I was the only one...

(S) arging the self-determination of the Founding Fathers, possibly hoping someone compares these principles to the worship by the right-wing of the State as some metaphysical authority and the manner in which the Right glorifies the Law.

sigh...

 

[ihopehefails]

The idea of the Social Contract Theory is that rational minds come together and give up some freedom in order to form a government that protects the rights of those people and have social order maintained. If peoples consciences were their own constitutions then they would be living in the State of Nature where it has been argued that life is inconvienced or that life is "nasty, brutish, and short" and a "war of all against all." From Hobbes, to Locke, to Rousseau this is one of the founding pillars of classical liberalism and republicanism.

The goal of social contract theory is to eliminate the "free riders" and to protect the rights of all individuals. The problem is that government itself is a "free rider" and, by it's very nature, must violate the rights of individuals. This theory is clearly faulty.

Life is good and the opposite as Hobbes described it not because of social contracts but in spite of them.

The belief and support in this faulty theory has misguided many people...

I've always thought that the social contract theory is much better served when it is a smaller scope like an agreement between two individuals and nothing more. The way some people like to interpret it is that it is an agreement between and individual and the collective which is not the same thing in my mind.