Why was the word ORDAIN used in the US CONSTITUTION by the founding fathers?
Question by tonycastillo_21@yahoo.com: Why was the word ORDAIN used in the US CONSTITUTION by the founding fathers?
We have a situation here in these the United States of America.
The problem is that the law fell into the wrong hands and voila.
Law makers of today sneak in those ear marked laws only to make the so called loopho;es bigger. Anytime they make a mistake they have a big hole to crawl out of.
Once it’s clear, in come’s back the creepy crawlies.
Why ORDAIN? as in
“do ordain and establish this constitution of the United States of America.”
It is only with the “Spirit of Laws” Montequieu, can we challenge the law of theirs.
Go on and keep inventing new laws, little do you know that the laws you invent have no spirit. Written laws will catch up with you once the law is back in order.
“If our voices are no longer heard in the senate and in the forum, let us follow the examples of our ancient sages, in writing about ethics and constitutional law” Cicero, Roman Senate ( letter to Varro ) 46 BC.
Law and Order, and the Rule of Law.
Who orders the law to bend the rules?
Best answer:
Answer by rukidding
Because somebody else had checked out the thesaurus from the library and that was the only word that they could come up with that fit there?
Give your answer to this question below!
From The Ground Up:HowToShoot In The 70s.
From The Ground Up:HowToShoot In The 70s.
Revolutionary New Golf Method That Works On The Premise Of Teaching The Key Elements In The Proper Order.
From The Ground Up:HowToShoot In The 70s.
Beating Cheating: Expose A Cheater – New.
How To Discover If Your Partner Is Having An Affair! (Highest paying Cheating Ebook on CB – 75% of a higher order value
Beating Cheating: Expose A Cheater – New.
In the U.S. how is it possible that………………?
Question by Intrusivosity With Medium Doubt: In the U.S. how is it possible that………………?
If I remember correctly, the U.S. has a Constitution and “common law” system. The Supreme Court of The U.S. hears cases (only) when the Constitutional Laws are “in question”.
My question is; How can one U.S. State pass legislation based on a “Constitutional Law” while other States “refuse” the same legislation ?
Yahoo Suggested Category : Physics
Best answer:
Answer by Dragon
It all has to do with their interpretation of the Constitutional Law. Often, one State views it differently than another.
Give your answer to this question below!
Q&A: If the 10 Commandments are the “basis for our system of laws,” why are only like 3 of them encoded in our laws?
Question by Wesley B: If the 10 Commandments are the “basis for our system of laws,” why are only like 3 of them encoded in our laws?
Recently a lot of Christians have been running around claiming that the 10 Commandments were “the basis for our system of law” and using this to justify trying to display them in courthouses and other public settings.
If that is true, why are only a few of the 10 Commandments incorporated into our laws–and even those had precedents in worldwide legal systems before the 10 Commandments were written and found in areas with no prior contact with the Christian world?
Murder and theft are the only two that are universal laws in America (and again, were found in legal systems prior to the 10 Commandments anyway). I’ll give you half a point each for adultery and lying because they can be specific types of crime in specific cases (adultery is not a federal crime, but is a civil reason for divorce, and lying is criminal when under oath or when it causes harm, but not in any real general sense). So that’s 3 out of 10 total.
Other Commandments are directly contradicted by our legal code (freedom of religion pretty much steps all over that whole “no other god before me” and “no false idols” thing) or else not covered at all (which Constitutional Amendment demands I honor my mother and father or not covet my neighbor’s things again?). And if I’m not mistaken Congress met on the Sabbath to work and pass health care reform, so even the highest law-making body in the land doesn’t keep the Sabbath special.
Further, many ideals incredibly central to our legal system–property, speech, privacy, equality, humane treatment by authority figures, expression, separation of powers, etc–aren’t in the 10 Commandments at all. Nor are other exceedingly common criminal concerns like simple assault, rape, child abuse, kidnapping, or bribery and extortion to name a few.
So, what exactly is the foundation for claiming the 10 Commandments are “the basis of our legal system” again?
@ Tapestry:
“Divorce is still considered a stigma…”
Stigma is not law, much less federal law, much less a “basis” for all other laws.
“…but also bearing false witness (which is not called perjury)”
It is perjury & I can bear many forms of false witness without facing prosecution.
Watch: “My neighbor shot Abraham Lincoln.” That is a lie. I admit it. Try to prosecute me for it.
“coveting goods or people cause the theft…to gain their possessions, breaking into houses.”
Right, and the associated actions ARE illegal. But coveting itself is NOT. Also, that is not at all why coveting is a sin. It is a sin because coveting questions god’s plan.
“There used to be ‘blue laws’ the prevented people from drinking on Sundays so people
would keep holy the Sabbath day.”
Not federally & not as “the basis” for all other laws. So you outlawed drinking (in some places) and buying cars. That’s all it takes to keep the Sabbath holy? I can still buy guns, condoms, lotto tickets, go to work…
@ Truth seeker:
“they are posted on the court house of the supreme court”
Please double check your facts. They are posted in the ABSTRACT only, and as part of a series of murals depicting multiple OTHER law-givers–from Hammurabi to Solon to Draco to Octavian to Confucius.
If merely being present in the abstract on a courthouse mural counts as being the “basis” for an entire legal system, why not say Confucius is the basis for our legal system? Or Octavian?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/capital.asp
“they represent law which applied to all evenly”
Sharing the trait of being applied equally is NOT the same as being the basis of a legal system. That’s like saying anything that also happens to be written in English would be the basis.
“to recognize god as supreme and no greater authority. the law does that”
US law does no such thing. In fact, it expressly allows for freedom of religion. The fact I can go buy a Buddha with a Santa hat on at Walgreens is proof of that.
Best answer:
Answer by ??????????? ??????????????
Evidence that america isnt a Christian nation.
What do you think? Answer below!
Cool “Executive Orders” images
A few nice Executive Orders images I found:
Gov Christ has been a friend to the unemployed and we ask that he continue to support us by issuing the executive order
Image by Florida New Majority
_MG_4119
Image by dbking
Executive Orders Food Court on the Concourse Level as seen from the overlook at the main entrance
Half staff
Image by mclib
In NJ, by executive order of the Governor, government flags go to half-staff every time one of our soldiers dies in action overseas–usually on the day of his/her funeral. Today we honor Army Staff Sgt Joseph Weiglein, 10th Mountain Division, of Audubon, NJ. He had just visited his local elementary school, whose students were writing to him and his unit, in January. Sgt Weiglein is the 74th New Jerseyan to die in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Q&A: Is Obama planning on an “Executive Order” amnesty for illegals?
Question by Dana: Is Obama planning on an “Executive Order” amnesty for illegals?
Several Senators have learned of a possible plan by the Obama Administration that would provide a mass Amnesty for the nation’s 11-18 million illegal aliens. Led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), eight Senators addressed a letter to the President asking for answers to questions about a plan that would allow DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to provide an amnesty if they can’t secure enough votes for a bill in the Senate. The letter that was sent to Pres. Obama earlier today asks the President for clarification on the use of deferred action or parole for illegal aliens. Text of the letter that was sent yesterday follows:
Dear President Obama:
We understand that there’s a push for your Administration to develop a plan to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. We understand that the Administration may include aliens who have willfully overstayed their visas or filed for benefits knowing that they will not be eligible for a status for years to come. We understand that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances. Deferred action and parole were not intended to be used to confer a status or offer protection to large groups of illegal aliens, even if the agency claims that they look at each case on a “case-by-case” basis.
While we agree our immigration laws need to be fixed, we are deeply concerned about the potential expansion of deferred action or parole for a large illegal alien population. While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States.
The Administration would be wise to abandon any plans for deferred action or parole for the illegal population. Such a move would further erode the American public’s confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books.
We would appreciate receiving a commitment that the Administration has no plans to use either authority to change the current position of a large group of illegal aliens already in the United States, and ask that you respond to us about this matter as soon as possible.
Do ou think Obama is planning on an “Executive Order” amnesty for illegals?
Best answer:
Answer by romack45
If the S.O.B. does that he will assure democrat defeat in November, and they better beef up the security for him.
Add your own answer in the comments!