View Single Post
Feb3-12, 03:29 PM
P: 530
Quote Quote by Jasongreat View Post
The south was trying to protect thier legal property, it was the US government when writing the constitution that continued the princple of slaves(human beings) being property.
The original Constitution nowhere mentioned "slave" or "slavery". In fact, it tries to dodge that issue in a few places, like where states get to include in their population for representation purposes "three fifths of all other Persons."
Protecting property is one of the enumerated powers of the general government.
The founders did found thirteen different colonies(countries) domestically, one unified front for foreign affairs like treaties, wars, and trade, atleast they intended to.
Everybody else would call it a nation -- it's more than (say) the European Union.

The only problem I have with the term democracy being used is we are not a democracy, that belief is the one that allows for the justification of tyrannical policies.
Pure hairsplitting. Reminds me of the lengthy argument I once had on another board about someone who insisted that the UK is not a "crowned republic" or a "monarchical republic".
The constitution should be legally binding, however it has not proven to be so in most cases.
News to me and to just about every jurist in the business.