What the Founding Fathers Did

[Solomon]

Created a system that can change and adapt as circumstances require. That was their brilliance.

They assumed that the system would need to change from time to time and provided a way to do that non-violently.

If the people want to be socialist, the system can accommodate that. They would turn over in their graves to hear people today talk about "what the founding fathers intended".

Secondly, the reason that fundamentalist Christians are wrong is that Christianity and the American ethos are in severe conflict and can't be reconciled. The American way is freedom of thought and democracy. The Christian way is "every knee shall be bowed".

[Dr Morbius]

1. A fine post. Here's another thing the founders did:

They drank. Heavily. Water in Philadelphia at the time of the writing of the Constitution was fraught with dysentery and numerous other bacteria. Our nation's founders drank a lot of beer, as beer was a safer beverage than water.

Something to bear in mind when our nation's founders are deified. These were brilliant and able men, but men only, and what they intended has little bearing on how we should govern ourselves.

[Xithras]

6. True, but...

Keep in mind that nearly all of the beer consumed back then were Table Beers, which were British ale's with extremely low alcohol content. The alcohol content was so low that they gave it to their children, and you could drink the stuff all day without getting drunk. Table beers were actually served in many European schools as lunchtime drinks right up until the 1970's, and there is a push to bring them back again because they're healthier than soda's and the other sugary drinks that replaced them.

Don't hold their beer drinking against them :)

[tabasco]

9. Good info.

BEER IS GOOD FOR YOU.

[customerserviceguy]

10. Good?

Beer is sacred in my house!

[Dr Morbius]

11. Oh, no. I was actually pretty impressed that old men could drink beer all day...

...and still found a government that changed the world! Maybe it was the rum; I'm given to understand they were fond of rum as well.

I still think you could give our current Congress - especially the Senate - potent beer all day and not miss a damn thing. Might get better results out of the GOP, actually.

[JuniperLea]

2. Christians and Christianity ethos are in severe conflict!

Not all Christians are Christ-like... I'd venture to say the louder and more forceful they are, the further from Christ-like they are.

[Solomon]

3. Agreed.

[Angry Dragon]

4. I could not agree with you more

[kctim]

5. Bypassing their brilliance

is why we are in the position we are.
Our govt should never have gotten away from the 2/3 required to alter the path we take.

[RandomThoughts]

7. I have had issues on interpretations of that point.

"every knee shall be bowed".


I said once, I would never worship something that claimed to be God and only wanted to be worshipped. I think God wants to share his love and justice, and that earns worship and praise.


I don't think it is some forced thing that will happen because people have to, but because it makes sense, if you think of God as all loving and kind, and completely just, and you reached some point of understanding of that, then it would make sense to show love and respect back. Not because God demands it but because God is love and it would be sharing that love back.

If something tells you you have to bow before them, and you do not agree, I don't think it is the real God, for I think God would guide a person to know he is loving and kind, and completely just, and from that if a person can lose his flaws, which will happen some day, then the person would bow just because it makes sense. Free will and love seem to me to be that God will guide us in truth and then our own decisions would be that action, not just because he demands it.


I don't think it is a claim of pride, but one of logical sense.


Hard to explain, but it is like there are many false God's that just want people to bow before them out of pride, which is the fall of the bad angels, so I think there is more to that saying then people think on. If something wants you to bow to them for their own glory, then it is not of God, but if it is because the glory is deserved by the sharing of love and justice, then it would not be a demand, but a natural effect of being around perfect love and justice, if understood.

[jody]

8. Trouble with socialism/fascism, they are not obligated to protect individual rights. Founders

were adamant about protecting life, liberty and property, things that are anathema to socialism/fascism.

[Solomon]

12. Lol well we are already damned then aren't we?

Socialism and fascism are not the same thing, by no means, so why you have that "socialism/fascism" thingy I don't know. Guilt by association I guess.

I see no contradition between socialism and protecting individual rights.

[jody]

13. Socialism and fascism share the same origin, the writings of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

Right Hegelians evolved into fascism.
Young Hegelians, or Left Hegelians evolved into socialism.

Each has their own special twist on Hegel's ideas but both are totalitarian and expect an all powerful central government to plan much of the economy.

[Igel]

14. They did provide a way to change the Constitution.

Most people talking about "what the founders wanted" are aware of it. Most people don't like it. "What the founders wanted" is a denial of "the living Constitution." Nothing more, nothing less.

However, while I'm over 50, I think only something like 5 changes have been made by that procedure during my life time. Oddly, one deals with legislators' compensation; another with setting the voting age; the third deals with the mechanics of change of power in the case of presidential loss or incapacity; the other bans the use of a poll tax (etc.); and the fifth gives DC votes in the electoral college.

We'll skip the "The American way" business as being as definable as a True Scotsman is.