-Caveat Lector-
-----Original Message-----
From: M.A. Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Kris Millegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Our once great nation was founded on a single, overriding
> principle: freedom. Not the freedom of a dog to roam
> however far its leash extends, but the freedom of an
> eagle -- to fly as high and far as its wings will take it.
>
>Ric Carter wrote:
> 'Freedom' for property-owning English-speaking white males,
> that is.
>
><snip> additional emotive nonsense
>
>Can you cite the Constitutional evidence which supports your
>assertion?
That "emotive" stuff you snipped was:
>A bit less freedom for non-Anglophone or propertyless white males.
>A lot less freedom for white women, with or without property.
>No freedom, no consideration as human beings, for non-whites.
>Funny how particular the Founders were about allocating freedom, eh?
Now, you'll note that the Constitution left it up to the states to
define voter qualifications - in a representative democracy, voting
is THE basis of political freedom. Whoever is denied the vote, has
no say in the allocation and use of political power. The Founders
chose NOT to establish any national standards on enfranchisement,
instead retaining the status quo - and states had varied and real
limitations on just who could vote. Had the Founders been interested
in "freedom for all", they could have included anti-slavery, gender-
equality, ethnic-equality, property-irrelevant language in the
Constitution - which would then not have been ratified, of course.
Instead, the Founders included language characterizing [black] slaves
and Indians as 'fractional' humans, and left the states to empower
whomever they wished. And in the early years of our great democratic
republic, further bars to political freedom were emplaced in many
states, including but not limited to the disenfranchisement of French-
speakers in Maine and Louisiana, of Spanish-speakers in Florida and
Louisiana; and later establishing poll-taxes and other mechanisms to
prevent the poorer [and darker] population from taking their place in
the body politic. Can you say "taxation without representation" ??
Did the Constitution say, "Niggers and Spicks and Irish and Wimmen and
Injuns need not apply" ??? Not explicitly, no; but implicitly, yes.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
