This bears repeating every Fourth of July

wsuffa

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
23,615
Location
DC Suburbs
Display Name

Display name:
Bill S.
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining in the meantime exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislature.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing taxes on us without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule in these colonies:

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.

New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton

Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry

Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott

New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris

New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark

Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross

Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean

Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn

South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton

Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
 
Um, okay. Are we worried that the British might come back, take over, and reform our dental care system?

If not, then is there a sub-text here that these bad things that those bad guys did are being done to us again today? If not, then why the selective highlighting? If so, then where should this have been posted?
-harry
 
Whatever side is being bashed, which isn't clear or maybe it's both, it still probably belongs in SZ because of the selective highlighting as it is no doubt a political statement.
 
Last edited:
Selective highlighting is a consequence of a cut-paste job. No political meaning, unless you want to see one.

Just a reminder that our forefathers stood up for what was right and created this nation. Today is a good day to remember that, and remember why this nation was created. If you want to call that policital, fine, I don't.
 
Selective highlighting is a consequence of a cut-paste job. No political meaning, unless you want to see one.

Just a reminder that our forefathers stood up for what was right and created this nation. Today is a good day to remember that, and remember why this nation was created. If you want to call that policital, fine, I don't.
Yes Bill that is what today is for, well that and grilling. It is not Memorial Day part 2. Although we should always keep in mind the sacrifices of those who served and died in battle. It is not the prime purpose of today.
 
Selective highlighting is a consequence of a cut-paste job. No political meaning, unless you want to see one.

Just a reminder that our forefathers stood up for what was right and created this nation. Today is a good day to remember that, and remember why this nation was created. If you want to call that policital, fine, I don't.
Thanks!

I suspected that was what it was. Sometimes it can be hard to remove the highlighting after a copy/paste job. I will sometimes load it into a text editor (notepad, ultraedit, edit) first to get rid of it.
 
I figured that as well. If you can't post the Declaration of Independence on the Internet on the Fourth of July, we really are in trouble.
 
It only goes to show you how fine a line there is between appropriate and not appropriate. The selective highlighting made it seem political and the first few replies were definitely political. I don't care because I read and post in SZ regularly but I made the suggestion because people here have been offended by similar things in the past.
 
It only goes to show you how fine a line there is between appropriate and not appropriate. The selective highlighting made it seem political and the first few replies were definitely political. I don't care because I read and post in SZ regularly but I made the suggestion because people here have been offended by similar things in the past.

Well technically the whole Declaration of Independence thing WAS/IS political it was a political statement about the political system that was governing a British Crown Colony.
 
Well technically the whole Declaration of Independence thing WAS/IS political it was a political statement about the political system that was governing a British Crown Colony.
That too!
 
That too!
Yeah I think the issue is one of intent. Interpreting intent can be difficult. Some people want to see nefarious intent all the time, some people see it occasionally. But if we had a zero tolerance policy on political speech then yes, IMHO, this thread would be out of bounds. But fortunately the MC does keep the line a little fuzzy. Most of the time they get it right too. Which is a good thing.

And after saying that I hope no MC member gets their knickers in a twist thinking I am slamming them. All I am saying is that for the most part, they are human ;)
 
Well technically the whole Declaration of Independence thing WAS/IS political it was a political statement about the political system that was governing a British Crown Colony.
What I love is when cities ban fireworks...then complain that people disobey the law on a day when we celebrate a revolution against lawful authority.

irony.jpg

Ron Wanttaja
 
What I love is when cities ban fireworks...then complain that people disobey the law on a day when we celebrate a revolution against lawful authority.

irony.jpg

Ron Wanttaja
See I think the discussion you are trying to get started would put us right over into SZ territory. If that was the intent then there is an issue IMHO.

I say that because any response to your observation, be it cheerleading and agreement or disputing gets us into that area of political discussion that seems to be out of bounds and gets some people's knickers in atwist.
 
Last edited:
I love fireworks. I also have a lazy eyelid from an (illegal) fireworks injury from childhood. What would an American boyhood be without the ability to throw bottlerockets and cherry bombs at each other?
 
See I think the discussion you are trying to get started would put us right over into SZ territory. If that was the intent then there is an issue IMHO.
That was not my intent...but I'm guessing you've heard THAT before. :smile:

There are certainly good public-safety reasons for such a ban. Last night I watched the people three houses down shoot off a bunch of (illegal) fireworks...with the sparks dropping into the tinder-dry hillside below our house. Due to a fairly long stretch without appreciable rain, the entire area is in a "red flag" condition regarding wildfires.

So I don't argue that life is safer with a fireworks ban. However, that doesn't mean I don't see the irony in people breaking that law to celebrate Independence Day.

I'm sure John Adams meant to say, "[Independence Day ] ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations (as long as said illuminations are sponsored by government, and fire-works are kept from the hands of irresponsible rogues and those of an age too young to understand the hazards thereto) from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more."

Ron Wanttaja
 
That is a good question. I didn't bother to look. Ask Bill.


Its not what Bill posted it was the "Prince" reference YOU made in a not so veiled reference to GW. But you knew that.

What Bill posted is just fine in any forum, but you knew that too.
 
Back
Top