posted on May, 18 2011 @ 07:52 PM
reply to post by Byrd
Concerning #20: Did it ever occur to you that society was primitive, including legal slave ownership, not because of the founders of America but
because of the British system of rule over the colonies? I recall that shortly after the revolutionary war, many northern states abolished slavery,
almost immediately after the revolutionary war. Vermont abolished slavery in 1777, one year after the signing of the declaration of independence. Each
state had a different view on slavery, which was the intention of the 13 original colonies to each have their own voice, not be lorded over by an
empire a thousand miles away. So don't you think the conditions of women were also part of the British system of rule and not those of the Americans
who were trying to break away from the tyranny of the British crown?
The laws were meant for each state to create, and many state constitutions did include basic civil liberties like the right to a fair trial, since
that was again one of the main reasons for the revolutionary war. Some states were very religious oriented in their laws, something I would not have
enjoyed, but that was the beauty of the idea of separate colonies, each with their own laws. Washington was given the chance to be president for life,
but he DECLINED, only someone who does not lust for power would do such a thing. Again, an example of a 1776 personality.
The amendments were added because the entire articles of confederation was scrapped and the debate between the federalists and anti-federalists took
19. Ron Paul is for the entire bill of rights, the first ten amendments. If you are suggesting he would pick and choose among these ten that is not
true. Your previous statement said
The 1776 document didn't protect free speech or freedom of religion. It didn't have the right to bear arms (those were both amendments passed
10 years later.) It didn't have the right to a speedy trial,
Are you suggesting Ron Paul would not uphold freedom of speech? or the second amendment? Or the fourth? Every indication suggests he would uphold
I can tell you though one amendment Ron Paul would be against: the 16th.
I take it you are okay with reason 18,17,16? Peace with all nations. Even if it is just those reasons, aren't those enough to like Ron Paul? Even if
you disagree with everything else?
edit on 18-5-2011 by filosophia because: (no reason given)