Re: church/state seperation

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ambrose searle) wrote:
>> It is quite apparent that JTEM *does* "deny the truth or accuracy of"
>> the D of I.
>
>If so, in 1776, he would have been known as a "Tory," a "Loyalist," a
>"traitor to the United States."

But this isn't 1776, which was his point.  We've since been through
the revolutions of 1787 and 1861-5, and our sense of truth has
changed.

>Tar & Feathers was usually the antidote.

But this isn't 1776, which was his point.

>Thus, the Supreme Court said:
>"It is to be remembered, that the government of the United States is
>based on the principles promulgated in the Declaration of
>Independence, by the congress of 1776; '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; and that to secure these rights, governments are
>instituted.'" (Amistad, 1841).

But those aren't the principles being discussed in this thread.  As
JTEM noted, on the matter being discussed, the founders obviously
changed their minds, as evidenced by the words of Washington, and the
passage of a Constitution which in many ways ran counter to the
concepts discussed in the DofI.

>Probably one of the silliest arguments that you and Allison have ever
>tried to make is that the Declaration of Independence is not the birth
>certificate of the United States.
>
>I look forward to your response in which you make this silly argument
>one more time.

Why bother?  You know our position, and it isn't relevant to this
thread.

lojbab
-- 
lojbab                                             [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:                 http://www.lojban.org