Sun Sep 2, 2012, 12:04 PM
jody (26,624 posts)
Your comment re patriot implies either you haven't read or don't understand PA & VT constitutions of
1776 and 1777. They say:
A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OR STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA 28 Sept. 1776
That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE STATE OF VERMONT 8 Jul. 1777
THAT all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety. Therefore, no male person, born in this country, or brought from over sea, ought to be holden by law, to serve any person, as a servant, slave or apprentice, after he arrives to the age of twenty-one Years, nor female, in like manner, after she arrives to the age of eighteen years, unless they are bound by their own consent, after they arrive to such age, or bound by law, for the payment of debts, damages, fines, costs, or the like.
That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State; and, as standing armies, in the time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
As natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable rights it is impossible for PA citizens to have given away the right of self-defense and the right keep and bear arms for self-defense when they ratified our Constitution (1787) or when they ratified the BOR (1790) or VT (1791) to have given the same rights away when they accepted the amended constitution.
The men and women who fought against King George in the war for independence believed that each person was a sovereign unto them self and did not have to beg a king or other artificial authority for a privilege. When they approved a compact for a central government they retained some of their rights and powers that government were obligated to protect.
Writers used the word "patriot" to identify those who defend our Constitution and the principles of individual freedom that preceded our Constitution. Jefferson and Madison understood that and that's why they started the Democratic Party and were authors of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions that defended state rights protected by the Tenth Amendment.
The Oxford English Dictionary third definition of "Patriot" is "A person actively opposing enemy forces occupying his or her country; a member of a resistance movement, a freedom fighter. Originally used of those who opposed and fought the British in the American War of Independence."
Those of us who defend the inalienable/unalienable rights our Constitution requires government to protect are "patriots" in the exact way the word was used since 1773.
Are those who wish to ignore those rights "unpatriotic"? Perhaps that's your problem.
1 replies, views