Mourning the Dictatorship.

[Rightguide]

It

What is "cruel and unusual punishment?" Where does the Constitution include the word "abortion?" What does "an establishment of religion" mean? Is money speech?

It helps one to read the Federalist Papers, the greatest political discussion in history. If one really wants to understand from whence we came and why we are here the place to begin is there. Our system is unique, it stands alone, The Constitution has no peer. Its text of 4543 words is the most powerful and unique declaration of self-government ever penned by humanity. It was penned by strong and courageous people, strong enough to defy the most powerful and dictatorial force on earth at the time. They were wiser and better educated than the leaders of today. They understood the history and travails of Man better than we do today. They envisioned a state of being for their fellow man never before contemplated in history. They literally bet their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" on the outcome. From the father of the country George Washington who refused the salary that Congress offered to him to undertake a duty that would keep him from his family and business for close to eight years, to the brilliant visionary Alexander Hamilton, who after the war and demise of the Articles of Confederation, provided the leadership to the 13 states who were looking for guidance, penned 51 of the 85 arguments in the Federalist Papers that convinced them to ratify the Constitution, the foundational document that created the greatest nation in history.

PS: "cruel and unusual punishment" was a reference to what have been dealt out to the founders of this country of they had failed. This was on the books until the 19th Century in England:

Here's the actual text of the English law (on the books until 1870) outlining the death sentence for anyone convicted of high treason:

"That you be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution where you shall be hanged by the neck and being alive cut down, your privy members shall be cut off and your bowels taken out and burned before you, your head severed from your body and your body divided into four quarters to be disposed of at the King's pleasure."

https://history.howstuffworks.com/history-vs-myth/hanging-drawing-and-quartering.htm

Which any civilized person can see was an abomination.

 

[JohnEngelman]

It

It helps one to read the Federalist Papers, the greatest political discussion in history. If one really wants to understand from whence we came and why we are here the place to begin is there. Our system is unique, it stands alone, The Constitution has no peer. Its text of 4543 words is the most powerful and unique declaration of self-government ever penned by humanity. It was penned by strong and courageous people, strong enough to defy the most powerful and dictatorial force on earth at the time. They were wiser and better educated than the leaders of today. They understood the history and travails of Man better than we do today. They envisioned a state of being for their fellow man never before contemplated in history. They literally bet their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" on the outcome. From the father of the country George Washington who refused the salary that Congress offered to him to undertake a duty that would keep him from his family and business for close to eight years, to the brilliant visionary Alexander Hamilton, who after the war and demise of the Articles of Confederation, provided the leadership to the 13 states who were looking for guidance, penned 51 of the 85 arguments in the Federalist Papers that convinced them to ratify the Constitution, the foundational document that created the greatest nation in history.

PS: "cruel and unusual punishment" was a reference to what have been dealt out to the founders of this country of they had failed. This was on the books until the 19th Century in England:

Here's the actual text of the English law (on the books until 1870) outlining the death sentence for anyone convicted of high treason:

"That you be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution where you shall be hanged by the neck and being alive cut down, your privy members shall be cut off and your bowels taken out and burned before you, your head severed from your body and your body divided into four quarters to be disposed of at the King's pleasure."

https://history.howstuffworks.com/history-vs-myth/hanging-drawing-and-quartering.htm

Which any civilized person can see was an abomination.

"Cruel and unusual punishment" is often interpreted as capital punishment. I am enthusiastic about capital punishment. I like the gallows, using the short drop method of execution.

 

[ll74]

It

It helps one to read the Federalist Papers, l

It never helps to read the federalist papers

 

[Rightguide]

"Cruel and unusual punishment" is often interpreted as capital punishment. I am enthusiastic about capital punishment. I like the gallows, using the short drop method of execution.

I support capital punishment as well but the outright brutality of King George and his Circus of Death was a bit much.

 

[JohnEngelman]

It

It helps one to read the Federalist Papers, the greatest political discussion in history. If one really wants to understand from whence we came and why we are here the place to begin is there. Our system is unique, it stands alone, The Constitution has no peer. Its text of 4543 words is the most powerful and unique declaration of self-government ever penned by humanity. It was penned by strong and courageous people, strong enough to defy the most powerful and dictatorial force on earth at the time. They were wiser and better educated than the leaders of today. They understood the history and travails of Man better than we do today. They envisioned a state of being for their fellow man never before contemplated in history. They literally bet their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" on the outcome. From the father of the country George Washington who refused the salary that Congress offered to him to undertake a duty that would keep him from his family and business for close to eight years, to the brilliant visionary Alexander Hamilton, who after the war and demise of the Articles of Confederation, provided the leadership to the 13 states who were looking for guidance, penned 51 of the 85 arguments in the Federalist Papers that convinced them to ratify the Constitution, the foundational document that created the greatest nation in history.

PS: "cruel and unusual punishment" was a reference to what have been dealt out to the founders of this country of they had failed. This was on the books until the 19th Century in England:

Here's the actual text of the English law (on the books until 1870) outlining the death sentence for anyone convicted of high treason:

"That you be drawn on a hurdle to the place of execution where you shall be hanged by the neck and being alive cut down, your privy members shall be cut off and your bowels taken out and burned before you, your head severed from your body and your body divided into four quarters to be disposed of at the King's pleasure."

https://history.howstuffworks.com/history-vs-myth/hanging-drawing-and-quartering.htm

Which any civilized person can see was an abomination.

If what is what the writers of the United States Constitution intended to ban, they should have described it specifically, and not banned something as vague as "cruel and unusual punishment." All punishment is cruel. It is supposed to be. When cruel punishment is unusual, it should be inflicted usually.

My philosophy about the Constitution is rather simple: if the Constitution does not specifically say something, we should assume that the Constitution is silent on the matter, and leaves it up to the voters and their elected officials.

 

[ll74]

If what is what the writers of the United States Constitution intended to ban, they should have described it specifically, and not banned something as vague as "cruel and unusual punishment." All punishment is cruel. It is supposed to be. When cruel punishment is unusual, it should be inflicted usually.

My philosophy about the Constitution is rather simple: if the Constitution does not specifically say something, we should assume that the Constitution is silent on the matter, and leaves it up to the voters and their elected officials.

The writers of the Constitution had slaves and felt their wives didn't deserve a vote (not their slaves) and felt like their religious freedom was more important than the queen.

But yah ..their opinion on the 21st century ....amirigjt?

 

[jaF0]

"Cruel and unusual punishment" is often interpreted as capital punishment. I am enthusiastic about capital punishment. I like the gallows, using the short drop method of execution.

You'd enjoy Saudi Arabia.

Go.

Today.

 

[jaF0]

If what is what the writers of the United States Constitution intended to ban, they should have described it specifically, and not banned something as vague as "cruel and unusual punishment."

Should they also have specified musket, muzzle loader or flintlock not knowing that full auto weapons and armor piercing ammunition would be available as 'arms'?

 

[rockcasbah]

What is "cruel and unusual punishment?" Where does the Constitution include the word "abortion?" What does "an establishment of religion" mean? Is money speech?

Read the law books, you’ll find it all.

Or ask F Lee Butters, she prob has MSN links for the mentally disabled here.

 

[Rightguide]

If what is what the writers of the United States Constitution intended to ban, they should have described it specifically, and not banned something as vague as "cruel and unusual punishment." All punishment is cruel. It is supposed to be. When cruel punishment is unusual, it should be inflicted usually.

My philosophy about the Constitution is rather simple: if the Constitution does not specifically say something, we should assume that the Constitution is silent on the matter, and leaves it up to the voters and their elected officials.

In the founding era, as in the present era, all punishment is not assumed to be cruel by a majority of Americans and that goes for capital punishment as well. The left pretends to be against CP and other laws designed to reign in crime for political reasons, ostensibly because much of their political base support breaking the law and are in and out of the justice system on a revolving door basis.

 

[Rightguide]

Should they also have specified musket, muzzle loader or flintlock not knowing that full auto weapons and armor piercing ammunition would be available as 'arms'?

If the British had those type of weapons in 1775, the founders would have left that capability in the hands of the people as well. They left in the hands of the American people enough access to weapons of sufficient lethality to defeat the British Army. and they were privately owned.

 

[JohnEngelman]

The writers of the Constitution had slaves and felt their wives didn't deserve a vote (not their slaves) and felt like their religious freedom was more important than the queen.

But yah ..their opinion on the 21st century ....amirigjt?

So let's leave controversial issues up to voters of the 21th century.

 

[ll74]

So let's leave controversial issues up to voters of the 21th century.

They have been up to voters.

 

[JohnEngelman]

The writers of the Constitution had slaves and felt their wives didn't deserve a vote (not their slaves) and felt like their religious freedom was more important than the queen.

But yah ..their opinion on the 21st century ....amirigjt?

So let's let controversial issues be decided by twenty first voters and their elected officials.

 

[JohnEngelman]

They have been up to voters.

Good. That is what will happen with issues like abortion rights, gay rights, and stuff like that.

 

[ll74]

Good. That is what will happen with issues like abortion rights, gay rights, and stuff like that.

It has always been that way.

This is why the current court kicked it back to the states. Voting for people who nominate positions has consequences. Some voters just don't get that

 

[JohnEngelman]

It has always been that way.

This is why the current court kicked it back to the states. Voting for people who nominate positions has consequences. Some voters just don't get that

Lot's of voters, including women voters, want abortion to be illegal. I suspect that a larger number oppose gay rights legislation.

 

[ll74]

Lot's of voters, including women voters, want abortion to be illegal. I suspect that a larger number oppose gay rights legislation.

Yep....more people disagree with both of those things. Activist courts keep up....originalist(read: bullshit) courts don't.

 

[rockcasbah]

Which oil is best for my car?

 

[Wrong Element]

The recent Supreme Court session has returned more power to the people, either directly or through their elected representatives, than any court in recent history.

Unless those people believe in any sort of regulation of firearms.

 

[Rightguide]

Unless those people believe in any sort of regulation of firearms.

The majority of law-abiding Americans believe "they" have a right to keep and bear arms with little restriction.

 

[dmonty]

Hopefully this leads to new Amendments to return the rights that were just taken away (and the ones that will undoubtedly follow)

What "rights" were taken away? The recent SCOTUS opinions restored rights to the people and states that had been unconstitutionally violated/infringed and taken away by the government.

 

[dmonty]

Unless those people believe in any sort of regulation of firearms.

And yet the government (federal, state or local) had any constitutional enumerated powers to infringe on. All gun control laws are unconstitutional.

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The 2nd Amendment is explicitly clear the Federal Government and with the 9th & 10th Amendments, it incorporated the same restrictions against the states and local governments, as it was enumerated only "We the People" have the sole discretion on what arms we want to own/carry.

 

[dmonty]

The writers of the Constitution had slaves and felt their wives didn't deserve a vote (not their slaves) and felt like their religious freedom was more important than the queen.

But yah ..their opinion on the 21st century ....amirigjt?

many of our leading sophisticates today would rather talk about the Founders' failures, instead of the victories they won on behalf of freedom, we hear loud complaints about their supposed racism, sexism, and elitism. The Founding Fathers, we are told, did not really believe that "all men (and women) are created equal." Washington and Jefferson owned slaves. Women and the poor were excluded from voting. So how can we take seriously the Founders' supposed belief in human equality?

So the term "Founders," I mean those who served in notable public offices from about 1765 to 1800, especially the authors of constitutions, laws, and other important public documents.

Women were understood by everyone to be included in the "all men" (all human beings) who are created equal. In New Jersey, women voted in elections routinely during the 1790s and early 1800s, for the first time anywhere in world history. after the founding era, that women and men have equal importance, but different roles, in the family and society. The best protection of women's rights, in the minds of both the men and the women of the founding era, was the core private association of a free and civilized society: lifelong marriage and the family. The alternatives—permitting no-fault divorce, pushing women into the job market, and legitimizing the treatment of women (and men) as sex objects—were thought to dehumanize and exploit, not liberate. "women's" rights were a little more nuanced then your stated claim, most it was the states and note the federal national government that denied women rights... https://ap.gilderlehrman.org/essay/legal-status-women-1776–1830

 

[ll74]

many of our leading sophisticates today would rather talk about the Founders' failures, instead of the victories they won on behalf of freedom, we hear loud complaints about their supposed racism, sexism, and elitism. The Founding Fathers, we are told, did not really believe that "all men (and women) are created equal." Washington and Jefferson owned slaves. Women and the poor were excluded from voting. So how can we take seriously the Founders' supposed belief in human equality?

So the term "Founders," I mean those who served in notable public offices from about 1765 to 1800, especially the authors of constitutions, laws, and other important public documents.

Women were understood by everyone to be included in the "all men" (all human beings) who are created equal. In New Jersey, women voted in elections routinely during the 1790s and early 1800s, for the first time anywhere in world history. after the founding era, that women and men have equal importance, but different roles, in the family and society. The best protection of women's rights, in the minds of both the men and the women of the founding era, was the core private association of a free and civilized society: lifelong marriage and the family. The alternatives—permitting no-fault divorce, pushing women into the job market, and legitimizing the treatment of women (and men) as sex objects—were thought to dehumanize and exploit, not liberate. "women's" rights were a little more nuanced then your stated claim, most it was the states and note the federal national government that denied women rights... https://ap.gilderlehrman.org/essay/legal-status-women-1776–1830

You're long winded for no reason. The founding fathers did not have our current world in mind.