Whoa guys whoa! The quote wasn't that bad but just the word "force" should have turned you all livid. I always that liberty lovers were against force. Yes children should learn the constitution, I know I did and am refreshing myself with it daily. There are so many adults on this site that don't know it at all. Some say that the purpose of the constitution was to protect our liberties, that is not correct. The purpose of the constituion is in the preamble "in order to form a more perfect union" etc. Now there our protections in the Bill of Rights but I just point this out to remind us how slanted, thoughtless or stupid some adults are while the same time they want to "force" children.

Jim K the quote says that we should not give up our liberties to big government. It begs the question; would he be willing to give up liberties to small government. The quote should just say that "we will not give up liberties" period, fine. Shut up your mouth once you have said what you need to say. If the KKK, Aryan Brotherhood and other hundreds of other liberty denying organizations that might threaten liberties like being ethinic, being of a certain race, or being of a certain religion would you support a bigger government to investigate, arrest, and prosecute these threats to all of our constitutional or would you still seek a smaller government and let Nazi's and lynch mobs thrive. People who have sought their rights and freedoms under the law know from where liberty comes from or at least from where it is defended from: It is defended at home by the Federal Courts and abroad by our diplomatic and military prowess. (Again Jim K read more carefully the guy wrote a bad quote.)

Defending the Constitution which counted slave/property as worhty of congressional representation even though slave/property had no voice or vote was what gave the South a strangle hold on the USA for 73 years. Norhtern property of no kind received a similar recognition for congressional representation. By importing or birthing more slaves Sothern congressional power and strangle hold increased. Thus it could be said in some ways at least the Constitution was an abhorrent thing and defending this thing and at least that part about slave/property representation was what Calhoun was all about. There was no way to resolve this Constitutional error except War.

J I chose stop signs because Mike of Norwalk has spoken of his disdain for such things as being required to stop at these things or to be required to drive on a particular side of the street. Now what is arbitray or absolute power. In society we have conventions or agreements to do things certain ways. If you do not do them that way then it is the individual who is considered to be arbitray. In England and Japan they drive differently. My examples may be silly and absurd but they just point out the failure of the quote to be really meaningful or a universal principle or statement.

Nofziger's opinion that there is a drift is just his opinion. States, towns, and villages are often stepping on peoples Constitutional Rights. The Feds whom some prefer to call big government or socialists protect us and the Constitution from being trampled on by these little would be dictators or Nazi states. Fascism and Nazi'sm is not socialism, it is statism and one man dictatorship, Socialism and Communism particularly talks like Archer and dreams of the withering away of the state. Good job Ted it seems you really nailed down the mind of Nofziger by analysing his "forcing kids" comment. So who really is the socialist or the Nazi.

Many if not most of my friends and acquaintances were afraid of turbaned, robed, and swarthy bearded men after 9/11. I think we all were. Group think and discrimination based on these things is unfortunate but human. Racial or ethnic profiling at times like that is natural. While there are and should be constitutional guarantees that are enforced I think it would be normal to forgive or at least to understand the President's and law enforcement's dilemmna just like we understand our own.

I only gave it one because while he started off well he erred when he used the adjective "bigger". The quote would assume to say that he would be willing to give up constitutional liberties if a smaller government would solve all of our problems. Of course sometimes it has taken BIG government to guarantee constitutional liberties or at least Washington DC as in Civil Rights Legislation, hate crime legislation etcetera. Left with small government I guess folk would just go on killing and lynching each other over issues like religion, free speech etcetera that are guaranteed by the Constitution and of course must be protected by the government whether it is big or small. The UN has done and continues to do some good things. Don't totally surrender to these guys Sargon. (Again I repeat this quote seems to imply that the writer would gladly surrender constitutional rights in exchange for smaller government.)

You guys by discussing rules, regulations, etc. whether they be secular, religious, government etcetera are proving the falsity of the quote. I sincerely believe that a republic is an organization created by men. Tell me of any organization of men that does not have authority. Tell me of a republic that ever existed that did not have courts, prisons etcetera. When you join or get involved with an organization you give up your absolute and arbitrary freedoms. You will behave and act within the boundaries of the organization.

Does this mean that we do not absolutely have to stop at a STOP SIGN and that making us do so or pay a penalty is arbitrary power seeking. (1) A republic most normally has laws, (2) laws are meant to be obeyed, (3) thus a republic has power over free men. If you wish to be truly free go live in the woods and stay out of republics and civilization. This statement is only poetic device or sentiment obviously not actually true.

Is this apropos to breaking international law and treaties concerning torture, or what? I don't know where Mike, J and Jim live but I am glad I don't live there.My government is composed of my friends, neighbors and relatives, I plan on keeping it that way. Granted there are on occasion some bad apples, Delay et al.

Mike you lie. No nation recognized the Confederate States of America. You speak of driving on the wrong side of the street as your right and priviledge. What is it with you?

Anon you stated your analytical problem of perception in your very first sentence and a problem that many like Mike and others seem to have. You stated, "when people create a government above them". This has never happened in the USA, the government is not above us. the government is US. Do you vote for city, state, and national legislators and executives or don't you? If you do whoever wins is of by and for the people. Bitch all you want but you have had your say. Now if you do not like representative democracy which it appears that you don't thus I assume that you would like a more direct democracy where you could vote on any issue before the public. I would accept that with some reservations. Many on this site would prefer a government of Natural Law dictated by I know not whom.

Warren you need to consult your thesaurs and come up with a new cliche. "you are clueless" is a little trite and out worn.

Warren I hosted two students and was an area superviser of 20 students from Europe primarily. A great experience it was.

Great job Simon. I am with the thumbs down guys on this one. Obvioualy individual(s) freedom or the greatest freedom for the largest number of individuals is enhanced by social justice. The greatest amount of freedom for a given individual who can finagle a way to use others is enhanced by a lack of social justice.

So good to see the likes of Helorat, Eric et al back on these pages. Not that I agree with them all that much but hey that is liberty and I am all for it. Bring it on!

I believe this is to complex for the assembled students.

Best quote yet!

I have a proble with a guy who appears on Network TV always wearing a buckskin fringed leather jacket.

And the limitation of the Power of Generals. Say what!

This guy was from, South Carolina enough said.

BS: the south fought for money and power just like the Nazi's did. What Lincoln was referring to is whether or not a people who joined together for the purposes expressed in the Declaration and Constitution would stay together and continued to be so dedicated to the founding principles or woudl dissemble into a fractions mob interested in themeselves only. Menecken is way off base here. I live in the South and they don't believe any of this BS.

Unlike you Mike I have no agenda but the truth. It drives me nuts to see your misstatements or lack of history or twisting history for some reason apparently of your own. I have faith that things will work out if but only if we tell the truth. My knowledge of you is that you don't. If you don't believe or don't care that world wide recognition of The Confederate States of America was a significant issue you got more marbles loose than I ever thoght before. The issue I am trying to prove is you don't know what you are talking about.

Mike we think it is endowed by our creator and thus we enforce it. As no one has ever been to heaven and returned we have no direct knowledge of heaven or of inalienable rights creation. It is a construction and a good construction. I love it. If you cannot answer your simplistic questions you have a real thinking problem and know nothing of histroy.

Good Intentions, Bad Intentions, No Intentions which would you choose.