[–] another_dot ago
The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants.
old Tom knew what was up..
[–] cyclops1771 ago
Pretty sure Tom was approving of the Terror with that comment, and directing it against his political foes, including President Washington, WHILE Secretary of State. Tom was a snobbish elite hyprocrite. Had some damn good ideas, though.
[–] uab 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
The constitution is what constituted the legal person USA. That owns the land area often called America, sometimes called Columbia (not Colombia, that is another land area). If that legal person hadn't been constituted, it would not exist, and so there would have been no such legal person to restrain.
This is what constitution is, it's creation, legalistic creation, word magic. Constitution is quite like incorporation, where the latter creates a different type of legal person, a corporation, that is subject to the jurisdiction of The State. Whereas a The State is sovereign, subject to no one and nothing, and restrained only by itself.
[–] Greenzero86 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
When the former enforces the latter, you get the most ideal tool of liberty.
[–] SolarBaby 1 point 3 points 4 points (+4|-1) ago
It concerns me how many people that I encounter out there in meatspace who don't understand this. Many good people on the right side of things will say things about how the Constitution "gives" us rights. No sir, it is merely an affirmation that we consider those things to be inalienable God-given human rights that no person or government has the right to deny a citizen.
This country has been in big trouble since long before any of us were born. It does occur to me which is sometimes easy to forget that the people already tried to stop the government from growing into a cancerous, toxic abusive power. It was the Civil War, falsely portrayed as a noble struggle against the practice of slavery, wherein half the country attempted to refute an encroaching Federal Government declaration of overreaching power over sovereign states. As it goes, the victors make sure the reality of that sad loss can never be discussed because of the "racism" bogeyman they use to obfuscate the truth of that conflict.
[–] rejectedfromreddit 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Lincoln was doubtless a great leader, but his posthumous hero worship is a major disservice to the thousands of people who opposed expansive Federalism. It's rarely mentioned that he stomped all over habeus corpus, having a man arrested and held without trial in direct defiance of a the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (who was acting as a sort of Circuit Court Judge at the time) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Merryman
[–] grillmaster 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Do these inalienable, God given rights exist for all people or just citizens of the states? It is important to remember that claiming you have rights is all well and good. At the end of the day, only the ones who can defend themselves have rights at all when nature has a say about it.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
[–] rejectedfromreddit 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Many people (on the left) claim that the right to keep and bear arms refers to the "well-regulated militia". They're essentially claiming that the Bill of Rights, which in every other line specifically enumerates the rights of The People, is suddenly, for a single clause, concerned with "granting rights" to the Government. Statements like Patrick Henry's provide context and support for an argument to the contrary. Unfortunately, the opinion of one of the Founding Fathers is unlikely to hold much weight when people are already ignoring the text of the document itself.
[–] MoneyIsTiming ago
Water is wet