TexasCHLforum.com

236 years ago the greatest nation the world has ever known was founded by the writing of the best "cease & desist" letter of all time(http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), which includes what, IMHO, is the greatest sentence ever written ...

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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

So, while we're all pursuing happiness today, what "self-evident truths" do you most cherish about life, liberty, and living in this great nation?

A-R wrote:236 years ago the greatest nation the world has ever known was founded by the writing of the best "cease & desist" letter of all time(http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;), which includes what, IMHO, is the greatest sentence ever written ...

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, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

So, while we're all pursuing happiness today, what "self-evident truths" do you most cherish about life, liberty, and living in this great nation?

Nice looking resource. I often refer to http://www.usconstitution.net" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, which is also an excellent resource. One thing though, your link being a government website I was surprised to see that Obama had not interjected his "accomplishments" onto every page, the way he did to the presidential biographies on the White House website.

That I am free to worship my Creator the way I see fit, can smoke as many cigars as I want, and teach my kids how and what I want them to learn.

Unfortunately, my self-evident truths don't seem to be universally acceptable today. Power does not come from government and the government is here to serve me, not visa-versa. Of course, thinking like that makes me a DHS terrorist.

I've tried to have this discussion with several people. The problem for me is that when they dismiss religion and the fact that God made heaven and earth, we get onto a slippy slope and ever seem to recover. I'm left to suggest that they are closer to the monkeys from whom they claim to have evolved than they seem to think.

I watched the live feed of the fireworks celebration from NYC last night. Seems like they did a fine job of honoring those young folks in uniform who stand the line so we can sleep at night in bliss. As we age we develop a little more perspective which allows us the opportunity to recognize that those who came before us, those who stood the line, the statesmen who made the hard and unappreciated decisions, were truly those who guided and directed the nation to where we are today. No, not everyone is always happy, nor have they ever been for the past 236 years with the direction the nation goes, but everyone can agree that this society, by allowing the open discussion and dissent, only proves that we have the finest form of government, and we should all be proud to be Americans.

chasfm11 wrote:Unfortunately, my self-evident truths don't seem to be universally acceptable today. Power does not come from government and the government is here to serve me, not visa-versa.

James Madison wrote:In Europe, charters of liberty have been granted by power. America has set the example ... of charters of power granted by liberty. This revolution in the practice of the world, may, with an honest praise, be pronounced the most triumphant epoch of its history, and the most consoling presage of its happiness.

And now democrats want to return us to the European model, where charters of libery are granted by power. A pox on them, and all who think like them. To them, I would repeat the words of Samuel Adams:

Samuel Adams wrote:If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.

I am embarrassed and ashamed for them, since they lack the sense to be embarrassed or ashamed on their own behalves.

Over and again in this forum we have heard these words,

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Then invariably follows, in some form, the vivid expression of hatred toward our government, its leaders, and our representatives.

But that is not the end of the clause quoted above. It goes on to say,

"-- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Did the governed, in our case, not give their consent for our government as it now is? Were not our representatives and our leaders elected by the governed?

I submit that the wrong people are blamed for problems we might have today, and that we are the problem.

I have seen words here lately that come close to fomenting insurrection, if in fact they have not done so. This great nation of ours has solved its problems in the way those great men in Philadelphia devised more than 200 years ago, and we can solve any problems we have if we stop whining and whingeing and ranting, stop just sitting on our hands, stop looking for others to do our political work for us, and work constructively toward getting our government to work the way we want it to work.

Jim

57Coastie wrote:Over and again in this forum we have heard these words,

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Then invariably follows, in some form, the vivid expression of hatred toward our government, its leaders, and our representatives.

But that is not the end of the clause quoted above. It goes on to say,

"-- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

You're right. That is why Governments are instituted among Men.

It's also true that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.

emcee rib wrote: ...It's also true that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it....

Just how do you propose to alter or abolish our form of government?

Our form of government, of course, is the republic instituted by our Constitution.

If you suggest that we alter our Constitution, please tell us how? By amendment in the manner prescribed by the Constitution itself? If so, what should be amended, and to what end?

If you suggest that we abolish it, just how? By armed insurrection?

We are talking, of course, about our form of government, not about the actions of those who from time to time are entrusted to administer its provisions -- those elected by the governed and entrusted with preserving, protecting and defending that form of government.

Jim

Jim, would you be so bold as to say that our government, for perhaps the past 10 or so administrations, has behaved with due regard for the Constitution........regardless of what the majority of voters at any time have wanted?

If the answer is yes, then how so. If the answer is no, then why not?

At one point does a responsible government tell voters, "No, what you want is not permitted by the Constitution," instead of "the Constitution means whatever we want it to mean?" I submit that elected officials know that changing the Constitution so that it will meet the whims of the voters is deliberately hard to do, because whims are passing fads, while self-evident truths are eternal. We are to fix our gazes on the self-evident truths, not the passing fads. When administration after administration strays ever further from the Constitution, it may not be time to change the form of government, but that is only part of the list. And, to do nothing about it but vote, since votes do not seem to matter anymore and are fraudulently cast in ever increasing numbers with the tacit approval of those who occupy the seats of power, is to invite an ever worsening situation.

Are you suggesting that we must, like an alcoholic nation, be allowed to hit absolute rock bottom before choosing an alternate path? How bad does it have to get for you? What kind of socialist workers paradise do you require before you would be willing to hoist the Jolly Roger?

The Annoyed Man wrote:Jim, would you be so bold as to say that our government, for perhaps the past 10 or so administrations, has behaved with due regard for the Constitution........regardless of what the majority of voters at any time have wanted?

If the answer is yes, then how so. If the answer is no, then why not?

At one point does a responsible government tell voters, "No, what you want is not permitted by the Constitution," instead of "the Constitution means whatever we want it to mean?" I submit that elected officials know that changing the Constitution so that it will meet the whims of the voters is deliberately hard to do, because whims are passing fads, while self-evident truths are eternal. We are to fix our gazes on the self-evident truths, not the passing fads. When administration after administration strays ever further from the Constitution, it may not be time to change the form of government, but that is only part of the list. And, to do nothing about it but vote, since votes do not seem to matter anymore and are fraudulently cast in ever increasing numbers with the tacit approval of those who occupy the seats of power, is to invite an ever worsening situation.

Are you suggesting that we must, like an alcoholic nation, be allowed to hit absolute rock bottom before choosing an alternate path? How bad does it have to get for you? What kind of socialist workers paradise do you require before you would be willing to hoist the Jolly Roger?

You've changed the subject again, Chris. Emcee rib and I were talking about altering or abolishing our form of government -- our Constitution.

I would submit that the solution for your problem, how those we elect conform to their duties under that Constititution, is for all those of your opinion to get out there and vote for your preferred brand of representatives on the Hill and in the White House, not to abolish the greatest Constitution ever devised, particularly not by armed insurrection, as clearly suggested by some here, who, like me, are walking around with deadly weapons on their person.

It is terribly frustrating when It seems I cannot even compliment you, as I attempted to do a couple of posts back, without receiving flames in return.

Jim

Many people took an oath to defend the contitution aganst enemies. Some people honor their promises and some don't.

That's the only answer I have fit for a public forum.

57Coastie wrote:
It is terribly frustrating when It seems I cannot even compliment you, as I attempted to do a couple of posts back, without receiving flames in return.

Jim

Is the compliment in another thread? I looked back in your posts in this thread and didn't see any compliment towards any member.

Edit: I was bored enough to go digging for it. I found the compliment, which complimented a specific post of TAMs while implying that it was rare to see a "good imformative post" on this board.

So it was a compliment of sorts, though coupled with a backhanded dig at the rest of the forum. So, there's that.

74novaman wrote:

57Coastie wrote:
It is terribly frustrating when It seems I cannot even compliment you, as I attempted to do a couple of posts back, without receiving flames in return.

Jim

Is the compliment in another thread? I looked back in your posts in this thread and didn't see any compliment towards any member.

Edit: I was bored enough to go digging for it. I found the compliment, which complimented a specific post of TAMs while implying that it was rare to see a "good imformative post" on this board.

So it was a compliment of sorts, though coupled with a backhanded dig at the rest of the forum. So, there's that.

Right you are. It was in the thread devoted to the UN "gun control" proposal. I must apologize if my "dig at the rest of the forum" appeared to you to be backhanded. It was not so intended, here on the forum devoted to political issues.

Jim

A thought I'll give you to consider, 57Coastie: You complained that you couldn't seem to give a compliment without being "flamed" in return in your views. One thing that might cause people to react negatively to things you post is this style of what my grandmother would refer to as "left handed compliments".

When you give one compliment accompanied by a dig, it can rub folks the wrong way. For example, if I told my wife "What a pretty necklace! It really takes attention away from your fat rear end", I should not be surprised when I receive hostility instead of thanks.

Just something to think about that might reduce the instances of "flaming" you seem unhappy with in response to your posts.