--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" 
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > > [...]
> > > > > > > All such documents would be "corrupt" in comparison to 
> > > > > > > the "Constitution of the Universe..."
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ...spoken like a true indoctrinated cult member...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Did you notice the "quotes?"
> > > > > 
> > > > > A true indoctrinated cult member wouldnt' have used quotes.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Oh, so you disagree with the statement that you made?
> > > > 
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > > I don't know if there really IS a "Constitution of the 
Universe" 
> > in 
> > > MMY's sense of the phrase. If there is, than any relative 
> document 
> > > would be corrupt.
> > >
> > 
> > That sounds like so much pap.
> > 
> > Why "corrupt"?  The U.S. Constitution deals with man-made laws 
and 
> > concerns itself with important issues like freedom of speech and 
> > religion, privacy, protection against self-incrimination, the 
right 
> > of women to vote, who can or can't hold public office.
> > 
> > Why would these necessary and practical matters be "corrupt" 
simply 
> > because it is a relative document if there is a constitution of 
the 
> > universe?
> 
> "Corrupt" as a whole, in the sense of "imperfect,"
> perhaps, given that presumably the Constitution of
> the Universe would be perfect, by definition.
> 
> One meaning of "corrupt" in my dictionary is
> "adulterated or debased by change from an original
> or correct condition."  Assuming there is a higher
> law, presumably current manmade law is an imperfect 
> reflection thereof.
> 
> And, also presumably, if everyone were governed by
> the Constitution of the Universe (otherwise known
> as living in accord with the Laws of Nature), we would
> spontaneously do what was right with regard to freedom
> of speech and all that stuff, so we would no longer
> need manmade laws.
>


yeah, and if my mother had wheels, she'd be a car.

I appreciate your attempts, Judy, to explain the corrupt comment by, 
presumably, MMY, but if we are going to apply this term to the 
constitution because -- relative to an enlightened constitution of 
the universe -- it is imperfect and therefore corrupt, why stop at 
using this description for the constitution?

Isn't virtually EVERYTHING in our national life therefore corrupt? 
Why single out the constitution?






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to