Everyone needs to go buy or rent the episode of "The Prisoner" entitled "Free for All". Then reflect on whether the system works for *you*. I recommend the entire series.

Tom C.



From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: OT: Take a course in philosophy, will ya.
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:14:48 -0400

On 4/26/05, Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
 In a democracy, the
> majority rules. The minority has no rights under the law. The United
> States of America is not a democracy. It is a republic. <snip>

With the greatest of respect, Tom, it seems to me that you (or those
who share your viewpoint) are making up definitions to suit their
agenda.

The thought that the "minority" has "no rights under the law" is simply wrong.

By minority, I assume that you mean "those who did not vote for the
ruling party"?  If it's not them, then who exactly are the "majority"
and "minority" to which you refer?

But here's the thing.  In a secret ballot, who knows who the majority
and the minority are?  So how can you say that the minority "has no
rights"?  They have the same rights as everyone else.

No matter who votes for the lawmakers, their laws apply to everyone.
The laws made by those lawmakers must be in accordance with the
Constitution;  if they aren't, then they're of no force and effect.
The Constitution is, in effect, the great equalizer;  it protects the
everyone from the "will of the majority" (whoever they may be).

Problem is, that a country doesn't have to be a republic to have a
constitution, a bill of rights, a charter of rights, etc.  For
instance Canada has a written constitution, but we're not a republic,
as we recognize the Queen of England as our head of state (I find that
humiliating, but that one's for another time).  England has a
constitution, but it's not a single document, but rather a collection
of documents, laws, and conventions starting from the Magna Carta and
continuing to today.  But if England and Canada aren't democracies by
your definition (since their constitutions prevent the majority from
oppressing the minority), and they aren't republics (having a
non-elected monarch), then what are they?

cheers,
frank

--
"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."  -Henri Cartier-Bresson





Reply via email to