The constitution said all men.. not women

a reply to: FreedomLost
The word "man" in English also has the meaning "member of the human race", which is why we can contrast "men and animals" or "men and God". In fact that broader meaning is older than the gender-restricted meaning; at least I once checked the full OED and found that the broader meaning was given an earlier "first use found".
There is no reason why the writers should not have been using the word in the broader sense.

originally posted by: FreedomLost
a reply to: jimmyx

noones gon read that if i posted em or the cont. They just look at the first paragraph

Where did you write a "paragraph"?

We're using the term loosely here, I'm guessing?

K.

a reply to: Athetos

i dont have the first clue on the solution so why am i saying the problem?, cause im like every other chum out there just thinkin im figuring stuff out & say it in hopes someone else can truly figure out a perception of whats realities most peaceful future.

No answer ha

i am american & i love where i live. thats why i think im doing better by stating things that i think could be true or not. but its better to at least say it cause its merica & that how we smarten upp

originally posted by: FreedomLost
The constitution declared all men equal to certain human unalienable rights, not women. Noone in their right mind would have signed that back in the day. Same goes for slavery & illegal scientific experiments. The constitution is not what we consider today.

If women had rights back then their would be no slavery in my opinion.

If experimentation on bodies was legal under king james we would have progressed way further with medicine.

If we took what we know now & put it to the future. Our goverment will have planet destroying wepons & we are stuck with tanks. Just like if the goverment of the 1700s said sorry we can only allow you bows we keep the firearms.

Noone would have signed the constitution if they knew this was gon happen. It is always rewritten & brought to court for a better appearance but on the inside its not what anyone wanted a few hundred years ago. They wouldnt have wanted cars either. Or video games either.

We live by our own standards because we know whats right. The constitution may survive 10 or 100 more years because of interpretations of it. Once the interpretations run out & their is one singular thought process for some people than we will create a different country.

I dont see anything but a unified world after this country has gon tho because we like them dope anime or good dream of everything united & at peace. thats america.

Yes many of them would have. Why don't you go read some of their writing and correspondence. Many of them were against slavery and were abolitionists at heart, but believe what you want.

When the constitution and the bill of rights gets torn down and replaced, you will find that you suddenly have less rights than before. That is what this whole movement is really about.

It's easy to make judgements and form opinions of the founding fathers when you probably haven't read any of their own words and ideas.

a reply to: DISRAELI

& thats why it was applicable today because it could be traced somewhere through the last 600 years to mean what we replace as definition today. The true definition of words mean somethin. so if i say crack addict it means cant stop jokin right?

a reply to: themessengernevermatters

so the tactical solution was to seemingly ingnore it & let it perspire slowly until more & more people accepted unisism? i mean it worked but thatd be a hard agument for some noob in court

a reply to: FreedomLost

Men

men

noun
plural of man.

Man

man

noun, plural men [men].

an adult male person. Compare woman (def. 1), boy (def. 1).

a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man.

the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind: Man hopes for peace, but prepares for war.

But then I have this gut feeling you know that and are having a bit of fun with us? At least I'd hope so.

Woe to man.

a reply to: Blaine91555

ha i mean no cap i aint foshizzlin yo. words only mean what the most powerful person in the room says they do

a reply to: FreedomLost

Actually, word meanings in legal documents have very specific meanings, and any other interpretation is due to illiteracy.

The Bible says

MALE = MAN

FEMALE = WOMAN

It doesn't address MEN.

originally posted by: FreedomLost
a reply to: jimmyx

noones gon read that if i posted em or the cont. They just look at the first paragraph, entitle to themselves what theyd rather divulge in & read certain lines futher on they feel that pertain to em cause them eyes & mind cathes em for their own gratitude.

ive read em a few times tho for sure

What in the Hills have eyes am I reading??

a reply to: Blaine91555

if you can make it in the books, that is now a definition. many definition nowadays because historically it is very inspiriling to have many definitions.

I was in court from puberty & stopped when i turned 18. I know how it goes. Im not proud of it. But i also know cops are our protection from the gov. if anything happened no matter where you are in america cops will stop the gov. from a takeover. they are our militia

a reply to: FreedomLost

I dont see anything but a unified world after this country has gon tho because we like them dope anime or good dream of everything united & at peace. thats america.

I mean that whole post but...that last paragraph though...just what??

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: FreedomLost

Yeah. What DB said.

originally posted by: FreedomLost
a reply to: themessengernevermatters

so the tactical solution was to seemingly ingnore it & let it perspire slowly until more & more people accepted unisism? i mean it worked but thatd be a hard agument for some noob in court

They had to unite a nation. Some of the colonies would never have joined if they would have pushed it in the beginning. At the same time there is a long history of abolitionists, among the founding fathers and whole movements of abolitionist within the colonies and the early states.

americanabolitionists.com...

a reply to: JAGStorm

haha about that. some backstreet huckstable/tom sawer & batman without the money kinda stuff. lol

originally posted by: FreedomLost
a reply to: Blaine91555

if you can make it in the books, that is now a definition. many definition nowadays because historically it is very inspiriling to have many definitions.

I was in court from puberty & stopped when i turned 18. I know how it goes. Im not proud of it. But i also know cops are our protection from the gov. if anything happened no matter where you are in america cops will stop the gov. from a takeover. they are our militia

I'll give you this -- I think you mean well. Keep at it if that's the case.

a reply to: carewemust

we created this nation on cristian bible but it has transformed into more. Thats the definition we wrote our constitution supposedly but others have different perceptions which might be the truth.

originally posted by: FreedomLost
a reply to: carewemust

we created this nation on cristian bible but it has transformed into more. Thats the definition we wrote our constitution supposedly but others have different perceptions which might be the truth.

Many of the founding fathers were deists or part of the enlightenment movement and most Christians would consider many of them heretical in their interpretation of God and the bible.