Oh exactly, however, concepts like enforceable personal sovereignty are
not recognized by the legal system we have, which indicates how little
weight the current legal system puts toward the idea of Natural Law. I
personally prefer the concept to the alternative, the force doctrine,
with the exception that I don't want to HAVE to beleive in an external
diety to confer those rights on me, but like the big bang, I don't
really see any alternative, so I live by the force doctrine. Since
devices like the Constitution were enacted as a result of the will (by
force) of a group of people to govern themselves, that is as close as
one can possibly come to my ideal at this present time. What I was
trying to point out with the references to that document was that the
statist document itself recognises that all rights an individual can
think of, that are not already enumerated elsewhere in that document, or
are not enumerated in a State Constitution the the individual resides in
(as permitted by the 10th amendment), do belong to and originate from
the people (i.e. individuals). Given this, I was pointing out how the
statists are not even obeying their own highest law in that they
routinely ignore the 9th amendment when it is to their best interest
(which is ususally all the time).
I don't see you or anyone else out fighting a geurilla insurgency
against the state, so don't tell me that I am blindly and willfully
bowing down to the state. I do act, on a daily or weekly basis, to
exercise those rights of which are presently most endangered in this so
called republic.
-- TANSTAAFL!!! Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ mailto:retroman@together.net Inventor of the Lorrey Drive MikeySoft: Graphic Design/Animation/Publishing/Engineering ------------------------------------------------------------ How many fnords did you see before breakfast today?