While 'oaths' are just voice utterances from the human body, can considered by some as meaningless, only as good as it serves one's benefit and to be
discarded when the benefit is gone, there IS more to an oath than that.
It is honor, within a CIVILISED SOCIETY, a man's word, who will live up to that promise come what may, OTHERWISE, he will be ostracized, cast out and
exile from his society whom will NEVER trust him again.
We can lose our human body, but we CANNOT lose our words kept. We came with nothing and will leave with nothing, but it will be the memory of us that
will be left behind to others, as role models with good will, or to be spat upon for dishonoring ourselves to the agreed upon laws of our society.
Next - who is the President but only the elected leader and representative of the People, another equal human but similarly has flaws just like every
mortal on Earth?
In dictatorships, the breaking of oaths to the leader/tyrant is punishable by death, for the tyrant is law unto himself, as he whims it.
In a Republic, the President is answerable to the People who elected him.
If he passes a law arbitarily that the majority of the nation is against it, but is absolutely necessary and unpopular for the survival of a nation,
then it IS his duty to CONVINCE fully the purpose of such a law, to help others see the importance of such a law.
However, if the President passes a law arbitarily that majority of the nation is against it, and cannot convince the nation whom are not fools and
idiots, then he would have deemed to have failed as a leader, and had reverted to what he truly is - a flawed mortal who had usurp his power over the
I can see where the question aroused from, for I am not apathetic to the gun debates raging. For the President to arbitarily seek the EO is highly
questionable, more so when there are had been logic and reason to keep weapons as guaranteed by the sacred Constitution, that even anti-gun lobbies
cannot argue successfully against.
To ban lawful citizens from owning weapons including assualt riftes and magazines, are only depriving them of self protection of both foreign and
domestic, but ensuring criminals or the insane who can get access to them dish out worse violence.
The anti gun lobby is a minority but are VERY LOUD,illogically so. They claim guns causes violence, but when challenge them if we do away with guns,
can they guarantee that there WILL BE NO MORE, NOT EVEN ONE SINGLE violent incident in USA? - they dare not, but look away and mouth their illogical
BS over and over again.
The solution to violence lays deeper than guns. It is the mentality of humans, not tools, that needs to be researched and addressed if we are to end
violence. It will not be overnight, but long term, and have to start somewhere. Banning guns or dishonoring the sacred Constitution will get us
nowhere, when gun is NOT the ROOT cause.
edit on 15-1-2013 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)