The Declaration of Independence - Outdated?

I am plotting out a mission I have.

It is my contention that The Declaration of Independence, although it is not the basis of the creation of our government, is, however, more important than the Constitution itself. It affirms by contract the individual's inherent power and responsibility. However, the signers are dead. This makes the contract null and void and just another historical piece of paper.

But if we signed the Declaration of Independence, all of us, and our children one day, and so forth - could we not help to preserve for ourselves, until the end, security -from- the tyranny of a government? Or will we be like the original signers and find true peace only in death?

However, I do have an issue. There is atleast one piece of outdated information... About the "present king" and such.

Should I keep the original text completely unaltered and have people sign it?

Or Should I, only for the sake of not having people sign a document which confesses there to be a king which does not exist at this moment, omit what is inaccurate for our time and have people sign it?

I wonder if people will go through the trouble of coming with me to a notary for signing.

I might even have us an electronic signing of The Declaration of Independence here on ATS if this would be allowed.

I have signed several variations of your proposal already. I don't let you know to discourage you; although, if you do a little google search I'm certain you'll find an abundance of these.

There's something in the air. The idea has been brewing, and bubbles are starting to rise.

The variations I've signed have been changed from "The King" to something else (every bit appropriate).

reply to post by TarzanBeta

a mission I have.

What exactly are you trying to accomplish? The declaration of independance was essentially a legal notice. You are not party to either end of that notice, and it's unlikely that anyone you know is either.

Should I keep the original text completely
unaltered and have people sign it?

What is your goal? Why do you believe that signing a centuries-old notice will accomplish it?

If, for example, you really believe that it is "self evident" that you have inalienable rights, what's the purpose of the act of signing a document, and who would you deliver it to? Or is this simply an excercise to help you affirm something to yourself?

I wont choose your words for you but it should address ANY past present or future form of man made/designed rule.
Which the king was symbolic of at the original writing.

reply to post by LordBucket


Perhaps because all of the original signers are deceased?
Wouldnt the entered into agreement by the signers have expired as the individuals passed away?
Although it is presented and addressed and lived under in theory, as an example, as an entered into contract,
I dont believe I'm am bound to it in agreement unless I'm a signer, correct?

Originally posted by sakokrap
I have signed several variations of your proposal already. I don't let you know to discourage you; although, if you do a little google search I'm certain you'll find an abundance of these.

There's something in the air. The idea has been brewing, and bubbles are starting to rise.

The variations I've signed have been changed from "The King" to something else (every bit appropriate).

It's good to know others have felt the same way and acted.

Interesting indeed.

reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

Wouldnt the entered into agreement by the signers
have expired as the individuals passed away?

I dont believe I'm am bound to it in agreement
unless I'm a signer, correct?

The declaration of independance was not a contract. It was a declaration. There is nothing to be bound to, and it did not constitute an agreement to be entered into. It was a formal notice given to king George. You signing it today makes about as much legal sense as signing a trial brief from a civil case you weren't party to.

What exactly is it you're trying to accomplish?

reply to post by TarzanBeta

www.cc2009.us...
Here's a place to check out, and there are several more as well.

reply to post by LordBucket


I believe he's trying to create an all encompassing document that spans time.

reply to post by LordBucket


It is obvious to us free-spirited people.

But it isn't so obvious to the people who want to impose their dominion over our very souls.

Essentially, you're saying The Declaration of Independence was pointless then and it's pointless now.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. I believe we are again coming to that stage which they faced which convinced them to sign a contract with eachother as a measure of agreeability and accountability that not only God can witness, but also that other people can take comfort knowing that no one could deny, even if to kiss the king's ass, for what those people truly stand.

How many people here serve the government in a most backwards fashion? Why is it that the government recognizes a corporation which is made powerful through money and not people, as a power - and counts its opinion as a power directly related to the amount of money it has?

A corporation is made of people, but then people are made up of cells. How much say do cells have in our ability to commit suicide?

The difference is that we have been endowed by our Creator with not only inalienable rights, but also the ability to think and act freely. Cells do not, so they don't get much of a say by nature.

And a corporation which is made of paper (money) should not have more of a say than the people themselves!

How many people are working the job you have - not necessarily because you believe in the cause of the company, but because you are just providing for you/your family?

Did you know that your presence in that company makes it possible that your personal vote means nothing - because you give power to that company already because it does have more power than you! And that company is a part of a larger corporation. And eventually, all corporations are run by the D.C. - which is the Bed where all manners of adultery take place. The husband of Government and its mistress Corporatism have both put down the country, the wife, the United States, and is forcing her to submit to its mistress' former position as slave and serve the needs of the husband and mistress while they play amongst themselves!

And you tell me that the wife shouldn't be standing up and saying, "Hey, just so that both of you guys know, I'm independent. I'm divorcing you and I'm going to find a faithful partner. You two deserve eachother. Here's the papers. Read 'em and weep."

And since nothing gets done without the wife around, what use has the husband or the mistress except to revel in their vanity until their work piles up to the point where they have no way to enjoy their whorish time together because -- guess what -- the dishes are all piled in the sink! "On what shall we eat?" The house is a mess! "On what shall we sit?" The grass is overgrown! "Will people think we are lazy?"

Or will they even care enough to ask those questions... will they just throw fits not understanding why everything isn't magically happening for them? Will they just throw fits because they feel entitled to all the special treatment they get because of the pressures of having to lie your way into your occupation only to get to the position to sit on your ass and vacation knowing that all your hard-work and pressure of keeping up with your lies and kissing ass has worn you out???

What I do now is not in vain if a few people feel more comfortable knowing that they have announced to the world that they are not carpets, but people - and without us, there is no such thing as government.

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

 

Wouldnt the entered into agreement by the signers
have expired as the individuals passed away?

I dont believe I'm am bound to it in agreement
unless I'm a signer, correct?

The declaration of independance was not a contract. It was a declaration. There is nothing to be bound to, and it did not constitute an agreement to be entered into. It was a formal notice given to king George. You signing it today makes about as much legal sense as signing a trial brief from a civil case you weren't party to.

What exactly is it you're trying to accomplish?

Any spoken or written word is a contract.

Your word is your word.

And to contract means to bring together or to bond. Those who signed it became that strength of the notice and also contracted with eachother to be in agreement.

reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

trying to create an all encompassing document that spans time.

Then wouldn't it be more appropriate to create an entirely new document to reflect that intent? Most of the DoI is a list of greivances that are unlikely to be relevant to anyone the OP might ask to sign it. I mean...personally I haven't had any british troops quartered in my home, or been boarded on the high seas and impressed into the royal navy lately.

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

 

trying to create an all encompassing document that spans time.

Then wouldn't it be more appropriate to create an entirely new document to reflect that intent? Most of the DoI is a list of greivances that are unlikely to be relevant to anyone the OP might ask to sign it. I mean...personally I haven't had any british troops quartered in my home, or been boarded on the high seas and impressed into the royal navy lately.

Good points - That is why the purpose of my thread is to determine how it would be wisest to go about such a process.

reply to post by TarzanBeta

the purpose of my thread is to determine how it would
be wisest to go about such a process.

Ok. So then again I ask...what exactly is it you're trying to accomplish? Is your goal to rally support? To help yourself affirm your beliefs? To create an avenue for others to be able justify rebellion against powers they feel a guilty allegiance to? Or are you trying to remind others that they are sovereign to themselves and have no reason to owe allegiance to governments and corporations in the first place?

Jefferson wrote his own document, specific to his particular purposes. You can do the same. But it's often easier to get where you're going when you have a clear idea of what your destination is.

Originally posted by TarzanBeta

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

 

trying to create an all encompassing document that spans time.

Then wouldn't it be more appropriate to create an entirely new document to reflect that intent? Most of the DoI is a list of greivances that are unlikely to be relevant to anyone the OP might ask to sign it. I mean...personally I haven't had any british troops quartered in my home, or been boarded on the high seas and impressed into the royal navy lately.

Good points - That is why the purpose of my thread is to determine how it would be wisest to go about such a process.

Well try to figure out how Hitler took over all power from his contry and you may have a shot. Someone might dump a clip in youer ass along the way doe.

reply to post by Logarock


Interesting you'd mention that - an entire branch of psycho/sociology was created after WWII just for that purpose. Why and how did such a thing occur? I would refer you to Robert Altemeyer's non-academic work "The Authoritarians" which is published online in many forms.

I might also point out that your "parting shot" comment indicates the same RWA characteristics.....

gj

My friends,

The Declaration of Independence is an out dated document. It achieved its purpose, but for a brief time. Soon after we, our forefathers enslaved each other once again under the shackles of the Constitution of the United States.

It is my opinion that a new Declaration is needed. Thus, I have not only signed such a document, but written into my heart, and live by it.

See the Plan at the bottom of my posts, if you haven't already done so.

With Love,

Your Brother

Originally posted by ganjoa
reply to post by Logarock

 

Interesting you'd mention that - an entire branch of psycho/sociology was created after WWII just for that purpose. Why and how did such a thing occur? I would refer you to Robert Altemeyer's non-academic work "The Authoritarians" which is published online in many forms.

I might also point out that your "parting shot" comment indicates the same RWA characteristics.....

gj

No wrose really than the ideas you have presented. You have to know what attacking this documents really looks like.

reply to post by TarzanBeta


The Declaration includes a list of acts imposed by the Crown that give cause as to why independence was necessary. More important would be a statement that given similar circumstances we will act again.

reply to post by IAMIAM


Ok if you want to present a new declaration then go ahead. Maybe its not half bad. But remember its a political document....ok dozy "Jesus" boy. Some like the baby Jesus others the one with a sword coming out of His mouth. But at anyrate...