Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wrong. They declared Independence (this happened before they took up arms, which they were forced to do) because the King refused to protect them from pirates (Barbary Pirates) and had basically abandoned the Colonies (except in terms of ownership). It was necessary for us to establish a Navy and to protect ourselves.
Let us not forget the"Stamp Acts" and the legal maneuvaring of Mass. and Rhode Island courts which made it impossible for British Customs agents to collect duties pertaining to the Stamp Acts. The actual first planned use of military force by colonists against a member of the British Navy offshore Rhode Island in 1772 in the attack upon the Gaspee (and the real first shot fired in the Revolution). And of course, at Lexington (April 19, 1775) the "shot heard round the world" was a result of the colonists standing firm their ground against the attempt of the British forces to disarm them so that they could be more easily controlled. Thus...the foundation for our 2nd Amendment. The attempt of British General Gage to disarm the colonists was the "last straw" in a series of events that built up to the Revolution.
So, yes, the first recorded organized taking up of arms by colonists against the British was as a result of the unlawful seizure by the British of the Gaspee (custom tax related). The last, the attempt of the British to disarm the populace.
Ask yourselves when looking at modern parallels:
Are the manuvers by states by re-establishing their independence from the controls of the Federal Government in the 10th Amendment Movement insignicant? No.
Are the nationwide protests of the modern Tea Party movement, however symbolic in nature, as an attempt to garner the attention of their Representatives who have seemingly turned a deaf ear insignificant? No.
Will any attempt of the Federal Government to disarm the American poplulace, be it through legislation or international small arms treaties, be insignificant? No.
"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Last edited by lifelongMOgal; 01-04-2010 at 06:46 PM..
If I were a Jefferson or America worshiper, I might also ask myself that. Since I'm a Christian, however, I seek my answers from God by looking in His Word. My political views are based on God and His Word.
Is god telling you to invade Iraq? There have been at least 100,000 civilians killed in Iraq since the invasion. Many believe that number could be much higher. Throw in the massive number of insurgents dead(between Iraq and Afghanistan it is likely to be another 60,000). Add to that coalition deaths of up to 25,000(more than 5,000 are Americans).
The total number of dead is probably between 150,000 and 1 million. All because of 9/11. You must be proud.
Is that Christian god also telling you to pass a federal law to legalize and then federally finance abortions. To teach evolution in schools and ban prayer. To give certain groups special priviledges while they rob, rape, and murder us at an alarming rate.
Quote:
Of course an insurrection is anti-American. They would be rebelling against the nation - the USA. Thomas Jefferson isn't a god, you know, even if he's your personal god.
I don't even understand why Americans are so opposed to a revolution. We aren't talking about some sort of marxist revolution or a nazi revolution. The people who want to revolt against the government only aim their sights on the "federal government", and all of these groups are anti-government. Whose stated goals are to have very limited government that can never again strip away the freedoms of its citizens. These are libertarian groups, Libertarian meaning liberty.
These Libertarian groups would actually give all Americans MORE FREEDOM, not less freedom. All Americans have much more to fear from the Christian right-wing, spread jesus across the globe through military force, Republicans. And the seizure of wealth and create a society of welfare recipients who live of the government tit, Democrats.
I cannot possibly fathom why anyone would be opposed to limited FEDERAL government. Almost all libertarian groups advocate states rights, even Ron Paul(the libertarian) has no problem with states passing their own healthcare plans. He just doesn't see why the federal government should be mandating it to all Americans, when so many states are unanimously opposed to it. If you want gay marriage or healthcare, move to New England. Don't expect everyone else to conform to your ideals. We are not all the same.
The role of the federal government is to protect liberties and the sovereignty of our nation. Not to run the economy and hand out entitlements.
Our government itself is un-American. The founding fathers intentionally tried to limit the federal government. Just look the Articles of confederation, the federal government wasn't even allowed to collect any taxes. Hell, even look at the constitution. Pop it open to Article 1, section 8. The enumerated powers are an itemized list of federal powers. If any legislation or government entity is not on that list, it is unconstitutional, period.
The only reason the Republicans don't usually propose secession is because they know all that needs to happen is for the Democrats to make a mistake, and they are right back in power. I wouldn't be surprised if the Republicans again seize control of both the House and the Senate at the end of the year. They don't need to have a revolution, because they are going to be right back in power before long, and they know it. The democrats are already in power, why would they care about a revolution, they are the ones in control.
You have to understand that if a Libertarian government took over. It wouldn't have to collapse the system. States would just be required to raise revenues themselves for their own programs through taxes, but there would be no federal income tax. The social security trust could just be privatized, passed on to individuals, or transferred to state holdings. There doesn't necessarily need to be any economic fallout at all. The problem is, our two-party system and its allowance for the back and forth transfer of power, not on merit but by default, gives our lobbied and bought-out politicans with a reelection rate that exceeds 90% no incentive to want to change the system. The people be damned.
Wrong. They declared Independence (this happened before they took up arms, which they were forced to do) because the King refused to protect them from pirates (Barbary Pirates) and had basically abandoned the Colonies (except in terms of ownership). It was necessary for us to establish a Navy and to protect ourselves.
Uh... no. The US didn't start having problems with the Barbary pirates until more than 12 years after the signing of the US Constitution, long after the Revolutionary war began. The American colonies weren't engaging in any trade anywhere near North Africa before the revolution; England practices mercantilism at the time and heavily limited colonial trade with any 'foreign' entities. We didn't have interactions with the Barbary states until the beginning of the 19th century.
I don't even understand why Americans are so opposed to a revolution. We aren't talking about some sort of marxist revolution or a nazi revolution. The people who want to revolt against the government only aim their sights on the "federal government", and all of these groups are anti-government. Whose stated goals are to have very limited government that can never again strip away the freedoms of its citizens. These are libertarian groups, Libertarian meaning liberty.
The last time I looked we have around two million civilian federal workers. Are you going to take them all on (plus their families)? They are all part of the government. Or are you just going to storm Washington D.C. and try to take over the senate, house, white house, and supreme court? Come on, tell us how you define the "federal government" you think would be so cool to stage an armed revolve against? And who are these people you're going to put in their place?---people, I remind you, who would be installed without a single vote. You know, like in dictatorships.
You'd be wrong sir. Secession would be rebelling against the federal government, not the United States. Also, it would be peaceful and the only ones threatening initial violence are the guys who have wet dreams about Sherman's march. As the founding fathers have suggested, the US and the federal government are diametrically opposed to each other. As the federal government grows, the United States as a concept shrinks. When the federal government becomes oppressive, no US exists anymore. There is just federal government.
You are no different than the radical jahadist who plot against America. In other words, a traitor & enemy to Americans. If you are all talk & no action than you will be forgotten as quickly as it takes to turn off the computer. If you are serious than you will find out how enemies of America are treated. Seriously, I don't think that you should even write the stuff you post [maybe someone will report you to those who deal with traitors to the U.S.]. You sound like a kid, btw!
Last edited by californio sur; 01-04-2010 at 11:17 PM..
Wrong. They declared Independence (this happened before they took up arms, which they were forced to do) because the King refused to protect them from pirates (Barbary Pirates) and had basically abandoned the Colonies (except in terms of ownership). It was necessary for us to establish a Navy and to protect ourselves.
Huh? Exactly at what point were North African pirates raiding the shores of America? I'm pretty sure the barbary pirates were slavers and not terribly interested in hauling stolen American lumber across the Atlantic in sloops. I've heard some interesting historical ideas but this one is unique. The Barbary pirates were a thorn in the side of British merchant vessels in the Mediterranean but the Americas were a bit out of reach. Back in the 18th century an Atlantic voyage was difficult, expensive, and dangerous... a bit more work than the average pirate cared for.
The US didn't start clashing with Barbary pirates till the Barbary wars of the early 19th century when they were messing with our rapidly expanding trade.
You are no different than the radical jahadist who plot against America. In other words, a traitor & enemy to Americans. If you are all talk & no action than you will be forgotten as quickly as it takes to turn off the computer. If you are serious than you will find out how enemies of America are treated. Seriously, I don't think that you should even write the stuff you post [maybe someone will report you to those who deal with traitors to the U.S.]. You sound like a kid, btw!
Threat of the tip line, is that Chicago style tip line. Sounds real familiar.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
