Why the Constitution refers to "Persons"

[Foxfyre]

I agree with most of what you say. No, rarely does any government agency including SCOTUS offer moral guidance. I have never sought moral guidance from SCOTUS, but certainly some of the early cases indicated the court knew the difference between right and wrong. Yes, SCOTUS rules on what is legal, even when they are wrong.

So in our public dialogue, do you agree that no Amendment in the first 10 restrict or define rights that are exclusive to citizen? That several specifically mention Person, and in that regard SCOTUS is correct in pointing out that enumerated rights are not restricted to citizenship?

I never claimed that treaties with other nations violate First Amendment rights.

This discussion has to do with Israel because in addition to statutes and policies in about 30 states, under Rabbi Trump and Little Marco, they want to carve out exceptions for Israel. That is, following the lead of about 30 states, they want to criminalize speech that is critical of Israel. So far they have not mentioned criminalizing speech critical of Ireland or Spain or any other nation, only Israel. Is that lawful?

And with all those pictures of our treasonous leaders at the Wailing Wall wearing Kippahs, it seems to me that another First Amendment issue is raised. Our government is supposed to be neutral on religious matters. It may not favor one over the other, and it shall not interfere with the free exercise of any religion.

Are our illustrious leaders like Rabbi Trump, Rabbi DeSantis and Rabbi Abbott favoring Judaism over other religions?

The 'exceptions for Israel' are via treaty that we have with Israel. All treaties with other nations will also be 'exceptional' for those nations. That is what I was responding to re your previous post. There is zero in those treaties that favors Judaism over any other religion and it is dishonest to try to make this issue about that just as it would be dishonest to try to make a treaty with Saudi Arabia or Qatar into favoring Islam over any other religion or a treaty with India as favoring Hinduism over any other religion.

As a dedicated historian, among other things, I read the Constitution in tandem with the Declaration of Independence that laid the groundwork for it, and the existing founding documents that argue the content and structure of it. Based on that, I believe the whole and sole content of the Constitution was intended to apply to those people who would be American citizens once the Constitution was finalized, signed, and ratified into law.

 

[mudwhistle]

If you are claiming to be a Christian, and you support the murder and mayhem practiced by the Jewish State Of Israel, you sound like Ted Cruz. You have not a clue about the message of Jesus Christ. You advocate for apartheid, hatred and genocide. Jesus would certainly NOT approve of all that.

Sorry to say that there's only been one Jesus Christ.....and that means that all of his followers aren't perfect.

I don't advocate for apartheid, hatred or genocide.

Supporting historical Israel doesn't mean you're into any of that.....especially since not every Jew is perfect either. It spells it out clearly in the Bible that Jews fucked up a lot throughout history.

But Israel's sins pale in comparison to the sins of the people you say are their victims. Not to mention the fact that Muslims want to put us Infidels to the sword and Israel doesn't. I guess supporting Israel's enemies is a suicide pact.

 

[PeterPilot]

The 'exceptions for Israel' are via treaty that we have with Israel. All treaties with other nations will also be 'exceptional' for those nations. That is what I was responding to re your previous post. There is zero in those treaties that favors Judaism over any other religion and it is dishonest to try to make this issue about that just as it would be dishonest to try to make a treaty with Saudi Arabia or Qatar into favoring Islam over any other religion or a treaty with India as favoring Hinduism over any other religion.

As a dedicated historian, among other things, I read the Constitution in tandem with the Declaration of Independence that laid the groundwork for it, and the existing founding documents that argue the content and structure of it. Based on that, I believe the whole and sole content of the Constitution was intended to apply to those people who would be American citizens once the Constitution was finalized, signed, and ratified into law.

No, they are by statutory and policy mechanism. No treaty that is repugnant to the US Constitution is valid. No law that is repugnant to the founding document is valid. No citizen has any obligation to obey any illegitimate statute or policy.

What makes you think the intentions of founding fathers felt the way you say they felt, what they intended?

Years ago I studied the Federalist Papers a bit. Have you found anything in them to back up your claim?

 

[Foxfyre]

No, they are by statutory and policy mechanism. No treaty that is repugnant to the US Constitution is valid. No law that is repugnant to the founding document is valid. No citizen has any obligation to obey any illegitimate statute or policy.

What makes you think the intentions of founding fathers felt the way you say they felt, what they intended?

what you posted here is very misguided and uninformed. The law is valid because it is the law. If the law is repugnant, it is the duty of the citizens via their elected representatives to change the law. Not disregard it.

I know what the founders intended because I have read, discussed, evaluated, debated, understood what they wrote and left to posterity.

 

[PeterPilot]

Sorry to say that there's only been one Jesus Christ.....and that means that all of his followers aren't perfect.

I don't advocate for apartheid, hatred or genocide.

Supporting historical Israel doesn't mean you're into any of that.....especially since not every Jew is perfect either. It spells it out clearly in the Bible that Jews fucked up a lot throughout history.

But Israel's sins pale in comparison to the sins of the people you say are their victims. Not to mention the fact that Muslims want to put us Infidels to the sword and Israel doesn't. I guess supporting Israel's enemies is a suicide pact.

If you support the Zionist cause, its philosophy and actions, then you advocate for apartheid, racial superiority and genocide.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you are a Christian you follow the philosophy of Jesus. You're painted in a corner.

 

[Foxfyre]

If you are claiming to be a Christian, and you support the murder and mayhem practiced by the Jewish State Of Israel, you sound like Ted Cruz. You have not a clue about the message of Jesus Christ. You advocate for apartheid, hatred and genocide. Jesus would certainly NOT approve of all that.

Do you support Hamas that attacked Israel two years ago on Oct 7 killing proportionately more people there than we lost on 9/11 also committed by militant Islamic extremists? Do you say Israel has no right to fight back against that? To do what it must do to prevent another "Oct 7"?

Do you support Hamas and others of the so-called Muslim Brotherhood who has as its manifesto the extermination of the Jews and the total obliteration of Israel?

How do you justify condemning the side that is exercising self defense but never condemn the other side that makes that self defense necessary?

And how can you possibly defend a position that making a mutual defense treaty with Israel somehow violates the Constitution because Israel is predominantly a Jewish nation?

Or relate that to anything in the OP?

 

[mudwhistle]

If you support the Zionist cause, its philosophy and actions, then you advocate for apartheid, racial superiority and genocide.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you are a Christian you follow the philosophy of Jesus. You're painted in a corner.

WRONG!!!

It is possible to support something or someone without being 100% in line with them on everything.

You think only in black and white and fail to notice shades of grey.

 

[PeterPilot]

WRONG!!!

It is possible to support something or someone without being 100% in line with them on everything.

You think only in black and white and fail to notice shades of grey.

One stands either on the side of right and good, or one stands on the side of what's wrong and evil.

If one stands behind the Zionists, one cannot also stand on the side of Christian principles. Unless, and there are plenty around, one is deluded.

 

[PeterPilot]

Foxfyre

I have knowledge that you do not. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. You can lead a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think.

Many sources have shown that the events of 7 October were a false flag. A few dissenters within the IDF have gone public with the information that they were told to stand down that day. Several countries including Egypt warned Israel of the impending attacks, but stand down orders were still issued. There is also the matter of funding for Hamas from Netanyahu.

What happened to our discussion of the Constitution? Are you trying to find someone else who agrees with your silly notion regarding citizenship and what the founders intended to do?

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfyre

I have knowledge that you do not. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. You can lead a man to knowledge, but you cannot make him think.

Many sources have shown that the events of 7 October were a false flag. A few dissenters within the IDF have gone public with the information that they were told to stand down that day. Several countries including Egypt warned Israel of the impending attacks, but stand down orders were still issued. There is also the matter of funding for Hamas from Netanyahu.

What happened to our discussion of the Constitution? Are you trying to find someone else who agrees with your silly notion regarding citizenship and what the founders intended to do?

You are the one who dragged Israel into the discussion on the Constitution, not me. I disagreed and continue to disagree with your version of what happened and the constitutional basis for our treaties with Israel. I also kept trying to drag it all back on topic. And I have discussed the Constitution far more than you have.

When you choose to be intellectually honest about what we are discussing get back to me. Until then, have a lovely day.

 

[PeterPilot]

Take your marbles and run home to mama, FF.

When it gets too hot in the kitchen it's time to retreat.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Intolerance Of The Intolerant Spinning On Its Head "

* Sectarian Supremacy Of Fictional Ishmaelism Is Debase *

One stands either on the side of right and good, or one stands on the side of what's wrong and evil.
If one stands behind the Zionists, one cannot also stand on the side of Christian principles. Unless, and there are plenty around, one is deluded.

The martin luther purported that waging a war in the name of chrisitanity was antithetical , though war waged by governments to protect and defend the independence and autonomy of its peoples was ethical .

Do you understand the intentions of fictional ishmaelism , and do you actually pander to a purported universalism by its sectarian supremacist , and is that what you would wish to take hold and be manifest over yourself ?

There is not a directive in the gospel to kill and be killed ( surah 9:111 9/11/2001 ) , or to fight the non believer and be harsh upon them , or to fight non believers until they are humbled and pay a jizya tax , as a dhimmi system - all in the hate speech militant manifesto of surah 9 , which was written 113th of 114 in chronology .

The genetic religion of qurayshism is not universal , and its universalism by sectarian supremacists for fictional ishmaelism cannot be dismissed , as its political institutions are not only regressive and degenerate forms of government , its expectations contradict distinct religious polities and city states for eponymous patriarchs as by its purported common deity .

. End of Debate Over Whether To Reconcile .

. Left Wing Idiocy Cannot Conceive That Fictional Ishmaelism Is More Far Right Than Any Other .

. Zone1 - Why Do Zealots Justify Violence Because Their Goad Will Not Do It ? .

. Zone1 - Eponymous Nomian Patriarch Genetic Religions Of Torahnism And Qurayshism : Isaac Versus Ishmael Sacrifice Circumcision Option .

. Are Circumcisions Performed Before An Age Of Consent An Act Of Illegitimate Aggression ? .


* When Application Of The Term Right Is Vapid Stupidity *

. Applying THe Term Rights As A Descriptor For Articles Of Constitution Is Slang And A Profound Error In Diction .


* By Etymology Of Per Son Then By Us 14th Females Are Not Citizens *

The etymology of the term person is per , as in countable by census , and son as in male ; it is a legacy of constructs for patriarchal society .