03-03-2018, 11:03 PM
IIRC, "...we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are..."
The Declaration of Independence. This, as stated, was under that political theory (from Edmund Burke etc if I recall correctly) in direct opposition to the "Divine Right of Kings"... which was most directly embodied in the colonists' time as George III, the Declaration proclaimed that natural rights flowed from God to men, not from God to the King, then to the people if the King wanted to allow that far. We do not get our rights from the King. Nor from the federal govt.
What we might or might not do today, or from which or wherever we might get our arms, under such a threat to the State (ie, wherein the free State is distinguished from the central government), does not diminish what the framers wrote. I think the Federalist papers and Supreme Court decisions (as posted elsewhere by Bjorn: http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthrea...nces-on-2A) et al express what is intended in the 2A. And that works for me.
I don't see any problems with that position... I think I am free to hold and to express it. And I also think that most of us on here (myself included) whole-heartedly support and defend the 2A along with the rest of the Constitution, so let's major on that and maybe allow for some minor differences if need be, shall we?
The Declaration of Independence. This, as stated, was under that political theory (from Edmund Burke etc if I recall correctly) in direct opposition to the "Divine Right of Kings"... which was most directly embodied in the colonists' time as George III, the Declaration proclaimed that natural rights flowed from God to men, not from God to the King, then to the people if the King wanted to allow that far. We do not get our rights from the King. Nor from the federal govt.
What we might or might not do today, or from which or wherever we might get our arms, under such a threat to the State (ie, wherein the free State is distinguished from the central government), does not diminish what the framers wrote. I think the Federalist papers and Supreme Court decisions (as posted elsewhere by Bjorn: http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthrea...nces-on-2A) et al express what is intended in the 2A. And that works for me.
I don't see any problems with that position... I think I am free to hold and to express it. And I also think that most of us on here (myself included) whole-heartedly support and defend the 2A along with the rest of the Constitution, so let's major on that and maybe allow for some minor differences if need be, shall we?
"Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"