• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Violating ones oath to the constitution.

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,276
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
You would only be able to call it a lie if you superimpose 21st century cultural mores and norms onto an 18th century people. During those times, the land owning patriarch of the family represented the entire family through the vote that he cast - very much like the representative republic that they voted for! If you think that the wife did not have the ear of her husband and he did not take her input seriously, then I would suggest that you would be, again, superimposing your views onto an 18th century people.

Or, I could superimpose their own thinking on them--not their "norms"; just because something was a norm does in no way validate it or say that even they didn't know it was wrong.

Just a few random observations.

In a letter to James Madison in 1789, Thomas Jefferson questioned whether one generation could bind a later generation with a constitution. Jefferson was literally only one step away from questioning whether a current generation could bind other members of a current generation with a constitution.

Christian country. Jesus's words were already seventeen centuries old.

Shall we say we cannot criticize Plessy v Ferguson because it was based on 19th century norms? How about Sherman's genocide of Plains Indians?

Etc.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Or, I could superimpose their own thinking on them--not their "norms"; just because something was a norm does in no way validate it or say that even they didn't know it was wrong.

Just a few random observations.

In a letter to James Madison in 1789, Thomas Jefferson questioned whether one generation could bind a later generation with a constitution. Jefferson was literally only one step away from questioning whether a current generation could bind other members of a current generation with a constitution.

Christian country. Jesus's words were already seventeen centuries old.

Shall we say we cannot criticize Plessy v Ferguson because it was based on 19th century norms? How about Sherman's genocide of Plains Indians?

Etc.

Paine summed it up best. " The vanity and presumption of Governing beyond the grave is the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies" Man has no property in man, neither has one generation a property in the generations that are to follow.. Thomas Paine

Regards
CCJ
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
This is the country into which most Americans are born into, and into which all immigrants voluntarily choose to migrate.

That said, our Founding Fathers provided ample avenue for redress of grievances, along with the means to change our Constitution, which has indeed been done many times, including full rights for all U.S. citizens regardless of race, creed, or gender.

This is the antithesis of "governing from beyond the grave." Whoever said that needs to have his head examined.
 
Top