Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 29, 2014, 07:58:47 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Political Debate (Moderator: Beet)
| | |-+  Declaration of Independence unconstitutional?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Declaration of Independence unconstitutional?  (Read 5307 times)
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1905


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

View Profile
« on: April 29, 2004, 09:10:37 pm »
Ignore

"...and to assume among the powers of the earth the seperate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them..."

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..."

I'd point out that our President has echoed the above when he's stated he believes that freedom is God's gift to mankind.

"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence..."

Okay, we're up to three references to God in the Declaration; I could go on, but I won't. So tell me that Congress shall not make a law respecting religion when this nation was begun on faith in God. But I guess the document which declared our freedom is still in violation of the Constitution according to the hardline interpretation.

What the first amendment was intended to do was ensure that the US Government would not establish a state religion (and force people to adhere to it - the Pledge of Allegiance hardly qualifies), and it hasn't. If they want to throw out the Pledge for having under God in it, they may as well throw out the Declaration while they're at it too. I'm sure the 9th Circuit Court could find someone it offends.
Logged

Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30617
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2004, 09:20:20 pm »
Ignore

I don't think Congress supervised the Declaration of Independence though.  It was done before the Constitution and since it was talking about natural rights from the 1700s perspective it made sense to talk about God making us all equal.

Personally I don't care about the writings on the dollar bill or the words in the pledge.
Logged

this is real
TexasGurl
texasgurl24
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8334
Japan


Political Matrix
E: -9.57, S: -7.91

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2004, 09:22:25 pm »
Ignore

i have no problem with god being on money or buildings but i have a huge problem with anyone being forced to take oaths or pledges to a god.
Logged

Lunar
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30617
Ireland, Republic of
View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2004, 09:24:26 pm »
Ignore

i have no problem with god being on money or buildings but i have a huge problem with anyone being forced to take oaths or pledges to a god.

Luckily no one is I believe.

Even in court there is an alternative to swearing to God if you're dumb enough to take it and potentially seperate yourself from the jury.
Logged

this is real
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1905


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2004, 09:34:26 pm »
Ignore

i have no problem with god being on money or buildings but i have a huge problem with anyone being forced to take oaths or pledges to a god.

I definitely agree.
Logged

KEmperor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8533
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2004, 10:46:42 pm »
Ignore

Um....in case you were unaware, the Declaration of Independence was written before the Constitution and is not a legally binding document.
Logged
angus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14658
Political Matrix
E: 1.87, S: -7.65

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2004, 10:58:21 pm »
Ignore

exactly.  and whereas the constitution was written by "patriots" and "founding fathers" the declaration of independence was written by rebels and troublemakers.
Logged
angus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14658
Political Matrix
E: 1.87, S: -7.65

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2004, 01:28:01 am »
Ignore

of course they were pretty much the same crowd.  what a difference twelve years makes.  history is written by the winners.  Smiley
Logged
migrendel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1681
Italy


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2004, 08:59:46 pm »
Ignore

Just a perfunctory glimpse at history will reveal the fact that the Declaration and the Constitution were written under two divergent legal standards. What kind of question is this?
Logged

Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Social Left/Right: -10.00

Registered in Massachusetts as a Democrat for Fantasy Elections, though now living in Rome.
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1905


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2004, 10:26:16 pm »
Ignore

Just a perfunctory glimpse at history will reveal the fact that the Declaration and the Constitution were written under two divergent legal standards. What kind of question is this?

I don't care. Point is that the Pledge, as it stands now before under God is taken out, is not in violation of the first amendment because it's not a law respecting or establishing a state religion. The word God meant many things to our founding fathers and I suspect means many things to us today. It doesn't say "one nation under Jesus Christ," or etc. One also has the option of skipping the words and I'd also point out that in the Pledge, one is not swearing allegiance to God or a god, so it's not in violation of the first amendment. Other than spout the usual jargon about how we'd all be better off we saw the world through your enlightened lenses, you have failed to argue otherwise.

What I'd say is what about everyone else's rights? Ever hear that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? The US Congress voted a decisive vote of support for the Pledge as it is now and the vast majority wants under God to remain in the Pledge, so if somebody is offended, tough.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2004, 10:34:32 pm by TheGiantSaguaro »Logged

KEmperor
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8533
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: -0.05

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2004, 10:38:41 pm »
Ignore

Just a perfunctory glimpse at history will reveal the fact that the Declaration and the Constitution were written under two divergent legal standards. What kind of question is this?

I don't care. Ever hear that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?

See, now this is EXACTLY why we have a Constitution designed to limit the power of government.  It is supposed to be a higher law, not subject to the will of the majority.  No law should be passed that serve the needs of the majority at the expense of the rights of a minority.
Logged
Giant Saguaro
TheGiantSaguaro
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1905


Political Matrix
E: 2.58, S: 3.83

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2004, 10:41:53 pm »
Ignore

Just a perfunctory glimpse at history will reveal the fact that the Declaration and the Constitution were written under two divergent legal standards. What kind of question is this?

I don't care. Ever hear that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?

See, now this is EXACTLY why we have a Constitution designed to limit the power of government.  It is supposed to be a higher law, not subject to the will of the majority.  No law should be passed that serve the needs of the majority at the expense of the rights of a minority.

You stripped it of its context. We're not talking about sending people back into slavery, we're talking about one guy who's got issues with his wife and making a national issue of it and dividing the country is how he deals with it. Please.
Logged

Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26772


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 01, 2004, 08:43:34 am »
Ignore

Just a perfunctory glimpse at history will reveal the fact that the Declaration and the Constitution were written under two divergent legal standards. What kind of question is this?

I don't care. Ever hear that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?

See, now this is EXACTLY why we have a Constitution designed to limit the power of government.  It is supposed to be a higher law, not subject to the will of the majority.  No law should be passed that serve the needs of the majority at the expense of the rights of a minority.

You stripped it of its context. We're not talking about sending people back into slavery, we're talking about one guy who's got issues with his wife and making a national issue of it and dividing the country is how he deals with it. Please.

I agree with Kemperor. The whole purpose of a constitution is tp prevent majority tyranny.
Logged

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
migrendel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1681
Italy


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: May 01, 2004, 09:37:04 am »
Ignore

Let me remind you that it doesn't say an establishment of a religion, it says an establishment of religion. The text would seem to indicate that establishing religion in any of its manifestations is unconstitutional, but conservatives draw an inference that only sectarian religious actions, indeed only establishing a national church is unconstitutional. The Constitution has never been interpreted that way, and it would be ridiculous to start down a truly problematic road at this point.
Logged

Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Social Left/Right: -10.00

Registered in Massachusetts as a Democrat for Fantasy Elections, though now living in Rome.
classical liberal
RightWingNut
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1761


Political Matrix
E: 9.35, S: -8.26

View Profile
« Reply #14 on: May 01, 2004, 12:06:32 pm »
Ignore

Wow, a Strict Constructionist Liberal.
Logged

"As for me, I'd rather live in a free country than a 'fair' one." --David Harsanyi

"What passes for optimism is most often the effect of an intellectual error." --Raymond Claud Ferdinan Aron

"The world is a rough and nasty place. Absent a change in human nature, it will remain so." --Robert M. Gates
migrendel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1681
Italy


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: May 01, 2004, 08:51:13 pm »
Ignore

If you go back to my legal writings, you will see that all of my jurisprudential positions are based upon the text of the Constitution. None of them are based upon the penumbrae which are so in vogue. I just happen to be a textualist who reaches liberal results.
Logged

Economic Left/Right: -10.00
Social Left/Right: -10.00

Registered in Massachusetts as a Democrat for Fantasy Elections, though now living in Rome.
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines