By: WilliamSchooler

WilliamSchooler — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:22:40 +0000

Authoritarian interpretation or word mastery of convolution.
After reading so many arguments did I finally realize this was based on word authorization and had nothing to do with examples which is the truth in all cases. Not made up examples of word play, but actual viewable results you could see in society and by Governments.

When we see laws manifesting and Government growing we see direct examples Liberty is now loosing its battle and this has no question at this point. When we see groups advancing on other groups as dominance such as we see with Corporations do we see more loss of Liberty by dominant forces. These need no words because the pictures then becomes the pictured truth where argument then stops, but if we simply keep it in a room of words then argument may go on and on and on. Complicate the words through many means especially through law and you have a party of Arguments.

Look at the educations of all these authoritarians making some claim, yet “show me jack ass” never enters the room. Let me be the prominent of words strewn and I shall be proud. Now show me their accomplishments by such a display as in picture form and nothing exists in the room.

They were a bunch of Pompous arrogant dumb shits for the most part, thinking they had all this knowledge yet were unable to ever provide proof of anything and their educations were the seeds of such dumbness.

Even Thomas Jefferson struggled with the laws he learned verses the Life he lived and saw real differences. But how many others actually lived that way or created a document of truths as they lived it and not as they thought it?

I would love to sit in that room of our Founders today because I would simply say show me these examples work, show me our communities are thriving and growing with abundances. Show me how this Governing body is limiting itself and allowing independent life to do its thing. They would all be hard pressed creating arguments out of thin air only so they would not have to show a damn thing and these arguments would end because I would simply bring pictures, and say LOOK for yourselves, what is it these examples share with you? And they would all look at each other and ask what do you mean? These show you the truths of your own choices and these are the effects and it shows Government growing, wealthy taking control of cities and dominance is expanding versus the independent people of this nation and their abundances. What are the facts if not the truths of examples there to see?

So to argue something you can see is what to self? The lie?

Too may in the room at that time all had their own versions of Beliefs and very few had good life lessons by examples they actually performed and their examples of that era reek of this as factual. And prior history to the english royalty will certainly show the prominent authorization of the so called educated, not experienced but educated. But to me the only educated are the life experienced and those carrying degrees of authorization have done very poorly in my view and the examples today only substantiate such a truth.

The original intent can only be performed individually because each has there own intent, it is the agreements that carry out and the examples show all the different intents.
There was no understanding Originally, there was a lot of agreements with lots of different intent and our examples today do not lie to us at all.

The Original intent was Independence from authorization, to decide for self. This was written and declared, yet where was the agreements of its use? This being the case, we lost our original intent and we sit in the muck of such choices today.

Screw prominent authorization, I can share volumes of its abuses and every poor example it has ever performed and we have volumes of pictures validating these facts.

Our root of this matter is simple and will always be independent choice and living and not to be defined by some other and their thinking, by our own acts and examples with one another is support of us as LIFE, with Liberty fully in tact and implemented and Life Pursuing its imaginations without all these made up limits of authorization. This was the revolution, this was to be the new way unlike any old ways before us and our own choice today is to create and implement a new revolution, a new document of Independence, a new separation, a new beginning without the old authorizations period.

Its been shown time after time consistently through all of history that you cannot fix broken, you replace broken with something else that works to support the original intent and you are that origin, so what did you decide? What is your intent? Authorization or personal choice for self reliance?

There is one doctrine, it was the only true doctrine and it is the original Draft of the Declaration of Independence because it did not lie, it documented the truth as it was LIVED. It was to be the basis, the very prime principal of choice making for this nation of states and independent deciding in LIFE in full support of itself as this Independent LIFE, and act you LIVE or you hall be swallowed by authorization of some made up religious text, the authority created and not given. The creator created us as creators and self deciding to imagine and perform for one another and not to be the dominator of life through such acts of authorization.

I would ask who are the lying in your house hold going into agreement with authority over others? That is your answer.

By: chrish43

chrish43 — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:06:37 +0000

Here is another very good paper on the history of the 2nd Amendment http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/89vand.pdf

By: onetenther

onetenther — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 01:07:25 +0000

I would think that if the writers of the constitution intended on having any other interpretation than what they wrote then they would have put that into words. The whole point of interpretation is not to have different ones but to have the correct one that we can apply to all cases. We need rules of construction to guide us on to what is to be correct, we also need historical evidence, the federalist papers, and actual arguments for whatever aspects of the constitution we are discussing. Those rules aren’t meant to deconstruct the constitution and turn it into something that it wasn’t meant to be because that would violate the contractual nature of the document. Altering a document and altering how we interpret it does the same thing which is to destroy whatever obligation one party thought they might receive in it.

By: The Real Original Understanding of Original Intent | Libertarios of America

The Real Original Understanding of Original Intent | Libertarios of America — Sun, 27 Jan 2013 18:23:31 +0000

[...] Read the rest of this article at: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2013/01/27/the-real-original-understanding-of-original-intent/ [...]

Comments on: The Real Original Understanding of Original Intent

By: WilliamSchooler

By: chrish43

By: onetenther

By: The Real Original Understanding of Original Intent | Libertarios of America