I think many of them perfer that people not make true agreements
because then the political myths would be
dismissed.
There may be a social contract but it is pretty basic such
as if I walk up to someone and try to knock the heck out of them I
better expect them to try to stop me, even hurt me, people come up
and of course they are alarmed at the violence and afraid they may
be attacked so they want an explanation to try and fiqure out who
they should be afraid of, who they should defend against or banish
from the area, thus we now have a court but the bystanders are the
ones wanting the court the guy I was trying to hit was just defending
himself he did not need permission to defend himself and he does need
permission to collect damages from me. Yet the violence alarms people
if they don't know if its a just act. So the bystanders say we will
hear the evidence and make a judgement on justice, if they are
concerned about seperation of powers they will ask a third party to
carry out the judgement( because if they carry it out others might
assume they like violence) or they could allow the victim to go after
me.--- In [email protected], "Cory Nott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> People who think of the Constitution as a contract also think of
something
> like Social Security as a "social contract." Ie. our grandparents
made laws
> that said everyone has to pay into a system and when people retire
others
> are socially obligated, by threat of violence, to take care of
them. Such
> thinking has a potential for a great deal of abuse.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of terry12622000
> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 10:09 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Purity
>
>
> Jefferson thought the Constitution should expire with each new
> generation, seems he suggested every 30 years. Thomas Paine said
the
> same thing. Besides even if it was a valid contract that continued
> for over 200 years if the government ever violated that contract,
the
> contract is null and void, it is very likely the Federal
government
> has at least violated the contract 1 time in 200 years, thus even
if
> the contract was valid and the authority over borders was valid,
it's
> not now. The same goes for the state constitutions, if the state
> government violated the contract at least once the contract is
null
> and void, the contract is no longer valid, the state government
has
> no legitamite authority anymore even if the constitution was a
valid
> contract and the dead could enforce it on the living.---
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
SPONSORED LINKS
| Libertarian | English language | Political parties |
| Online dictionary | American politics |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
