Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

The Declaration of Independance- some scholars say we've been reading it wrong.

<< < (7/8) > >>

Renegade:
You're trying to be rational. Stop.
-Renegade (July 09, 2014, 10:21 PM)
--- End quote ---

Wait...what? You thought that was rational?  :o

I am not too sure how I should interpret that.  :-\
-app103 (July 10, 2014, 01:51 AM)
--- End quote ---

Hahahaa! :D

I mean your facetiousness and bit at the end:

You would have a better chance of success messing with the Constitution and the last will & testament of George Washington to do it, than a punctuation mark in the Declaration of Independence.
--- End quote ---

While the silliness is fun, the last part there is quite sober. In fact, exactly that is happening if you watch the news or listen to a few academics and pundits. I know you're being facetious and poking fun at a few things, but the kind of insanity that you're pointing out is happening, although in a different flavour.

I kid thee not.

WARNING - HAS AUDIO AUTOPLAY
http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/curiosity/topics/big-question-constitution-out-of-date.htm

The Constitution is the foundational document of U.S. governance. In some corners, though, it's considered outmoded. Is the Constitution really out of date?
--- End quote ---

http://voices.yahoo.com/is-constitution-out-date-743981.html

Is the Constitution Out of Date?
--- End quote ---

http://www.examiner.com/article/is-the-constitution-outdated-and-too-vague-for-the-united-states-today

Americans across the country can all agree that the United States runs on the same set of rules, the Constitution. When the Constitution was adopted by the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787, it was written as a guideline to follow for the American people. The Founding Founders drafted and edited a document that was relevant for the times and would distinguish the United States from the country it broke away from. In the year 2012, the Constitution appears too vague for many Americans and politicians use its vagueness to fit their political agenda.
--- End quote ---

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/opinion/lets-give-up-on-the-constitution.html?pagewanted=all

Let’s Give Up on the Constitution
--- End quote ---

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1121972?uid=3737536&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103954119741

Does the Constitution Mean What It Always Meant?
--- End quote ---

etc. etc. etc.

Why not attack the Constitution itself... You would have a better chance of success messing with the Constitution...than a punctuation mark in the Declaration of Independence. ;)
-app103 (July 09, 2014, 08:34 PM)
--- End quote ---


It's already underway. Has been for a long time. ;)

Rights take forever + a day to get recognised, but they can disappear in the blink of an eye.

mouser:
Here we go again.

This thread started out focused on an interesting new academic debate about whether there was scientific evidence of a mis-transcription and its ramifications.
And now has very predictably drifted into yet another discussion of politics.

Can we please try to keep the rants about government in the basement so they stop taking over threads?

And if you absolutely cannot stop yourself from posting about politics in a thread -- just make your point and move on -- it's not fair to the rest of us when these threads become just one or two people arguing (or more often agreeing) back and forth over and over about off-tangent political points that have nothing to do with original topic.

I'm not saying these political topics are not important things for citizens to discuss -- and i'm not saying you aren't providing useful information -- but I am saying that they should not make up such a high percentage of the posts on this forum.  And it's especially harmful when such posts drown out the conversations that otherwise could be taking place.

Please.

CWuestefeld:
Coincidentally, I just saw this article. Apparently the Mexican government have been using, while considering cases, a non-existent "provision" of their Constitution.

DHS officers and the Administrative Appeals Office (“AAO”) within DHS have relied on provisions of the Mexican Constitution that either never existed or do not say what DHS claims they say. In Saldana’s case and in others, DHS has relied on the proposition that Article 314 of the Constitution of Mexico provides that...

At oral argument, however, the government conceded that Article 314 of the Constitution of Mexico does not exist and never did.
--- End quote ---

40hz:
And it's especially harmful when such posts drown out the conversations that otherwise could be taking place.
-mouser (July 10, 2014, 07:37 AM)
--- End quote ---

@M - Not that I'm disagreeing...but exactly which conversations are those that "could be taking place" that are being crowded out?

From what I've seemed to notice, about the only time an active and robust discussion starts taking place around here is when some legal or political consideration becomes part of the dialog. Which makes sense since you can only say so much amount about a tech topic before it's either exhausted or you start splitting hairs over details or arguing over brands. :huh:

Have you been getting complaints? :huh:

Renegade:
Here we go again.

This thread started out focused on an interesting new academic debate about whether there was scientific evidence of a mis-transcription and its ramifications.
And now has very predictably drifted into yet another discussion of politics.

Can we please try to keep the rants about government in the basement so they stop taking over threads?

And if you absolutely cannot stop yourself from posting about politics in a thread -- just make your point and move on -- it's not fair to the rest of us when these threads become just one or two people arguing (or more often agreeing) back and forth over and over about off-tangent political points that have nothing to do with original topic.

I'm not saying these political topics are not important things for citizens to discuss -- and i'm not saying you aren't providing useful information -- but I am saying that they should not make up such a high percentage of the posts on this forum.  And it's especially harmful when such posts drown out the conversations that otherwise could be taking place.

Please.
-mouser (July 10, 2014, 07:37 AM)
--- End quote ---


As I am the usual culprit...

I think you're mistaking some intentions here.

I'm not coming down on any political side.

I am coming down on "politics" though. As I've illustrated above in a few links, you can see how opposing sides use "for the children" to advance their arguments.

If anything, I'm apolitical, or anti-political if you will. I've made a quick/superficial case for politics being completely irrational, with evidence.

The original article has little to do with technology or science. The closest it gets is here:

And there, some manuscript experts say, existing high-resolution images show little evidence of a period.
--- End quote ---

I have not made any comment towards or against any interpretation of the period/comma.

I have made comments on how any interpretation of it will be abused.

I also made comments on reinterpretations. I've not tried to come down on any "side" other than the side of people losing recognised rights.

But, I'll drop that line of discussion.

Any further comments I make will be limited to comment on the linguistics or grammar of the content. I am more than qualified for that in a professional sense.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page