|
|
|
|
|
|
by CalChris
745 days ago
|
|
|
No, the relevant portion of the letter was when Franklin eloquently added that he didn't want to apply his private religiosity to others. Nor as a Framer, did he. I do not accept your divine law drivel nor do I accept your people's law either/or. Instead, I would counsel you to re-read and meditate on the Preamble to the Constitution, especially that part where it says in Order to form a more perfect Union. That part, the Enlightenment part. |
|
|
But that's exactly my argument! Franklin's beliefs about "populism" are based on "divine law drivel"--God's law imposes limits on democratic law. If we reject that--which is exactly what I'm trying to do here--what basis do you have for saying that the people can't make whatever laws they want?
You're the one invoking supernatural concepts--this supernatural notion of "bodily autonomy"--not me.