there are two sides to this coin, we also need to understand WHO the where refering too. If you understand the context in reference, the words aren't as true as you may read them today. The constitution was specifically written to ensure male white landowners remained in power in this new countries hierarchy. Woman, children, slaves were not a part of the group the freedoms were for.
As for 'general welfare', this could have meant that they didn't have these concerns, and didn't want to be responsible for providing for those of lesser importance. Kind of like now-a-days it seems.
I actually believe there words have become more important and encompassing now, then they actually were back then.
I find it hard to believe that that was there intent.
i'm not sure i see any connection between the inequity between a gentleman and that of a woman or black of the time, and the intent of the words i have quoted.
It overarching concern of these quotations is simply that the duties of charity and public welfare are those of the citizenry themselves, through private venture. The constitution does not issue government the mandate to provide these services, nor does it authorize the right to do so. The right to do so is reserved strictly to the people themselves.
This is a theme repeated many times in many ways throughout the years, and between these men.
The fact that they were insensitive or wholy ignorant of the rights and equities of women and blacks, to me, is irrelevant to the positions they took on the duties of government.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Honestly I still think the root of the problem is the insurance companies and thier rise since World War 2 due to witholding of money from paychecks and people not really knowing what they pay for healthcare. It's the same deal as income tax really.
Totally agree. GET RID OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I'm interested to know if in America certain people without an income and not qualified for any benefits have to pay certain taxes, like council tax in the uk? If so, surely your government like ours is getting something for nothing? And when you throw in no NHS as well, fuckin ell, what a fucked up way to run a country.
A restaurant with a smoking section is like a swimming pool with a pissing section
Comments
i'm not sure i see any connection between the inequity between a gentleman and that of a woman or black of the time, and the intent of the words i have quoted.
It overarching concern of these quotations is simply that the duties of charity and public welfare are those of the citizenry themselves, through private venture. The constitution does not issue government the mandate to provide these services, nor does it authorize the right to do so. The right to do so is reserved strictly to the people themselves.
This is a theme repeated many times in many ways throughout the years, and between these men.
The fact that they were insensitive or wholy ignorant of the rights and equities of women and blacks, to me, is irrelevant to the positions they took on the duties of government.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Totally agree. GET RID OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.