Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: It's in the CONSTITUTION, stupid! The FIRST PRIORITY of government is to "establish justice"

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 22, 2011, 10:41 p.m. EST by TIOUAISE (2526)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Many Americans appear to think that "Liberty" is the first priority of government.

Well.... in the famous "Preamble" to the Constitution, "establishing Justice" and "promoting the general Welfare" are actually named well before "Liberty".

However, with the passage of time, in a kind of "quiet and devious coup d'État", the wealthy elite gradually pushed aside the first priority and, two hundred years later, "Justice" and "the general Welfare" have practically become dirty words not to be uttered in polite company.

If you do insist that they are inscribed in the Preamble to the Constitution and that you are merely trying to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, you are branded a "liberal", a "Socialist" or a "commie"... when you are simply doing your PATRIOTIC DUTY and defending THE RULE OF LAW against the coup perpetrated by the traitorous 1%.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessing of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."

103 Comments

103 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by mrbill0626 (33) 13 years ago

And can you name any person who has been more vigilant in supporting the Constitution than Ron Paul? And Dr Paul is a peaceful man, more so than any of the other clowns in the government right now I think. All I am saying and all he is saying is "Give peace a chance" Peace is all we need. We don't need war! And the military-industrial complex that supports war. That's been the main reason for all the wars that have happened-money!

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Yeah - there's much to like about Ron Paul.. Even Ralph Nader thinks so! Did you see the interview they gave TOGETHER? It was amazing. I disagree with Paul about health insurance, though.

[-] 1 points by mrbill0626 (33) 13 years ago

Why do you disagree with him re health ins?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

He's against universal healthcare like they have in ALL Western nations MINUS the U.S.A.

[-] 1 points by mrbill0626 (33) 13 years ago

Do you think Universal health care (like ObamaCare) is a good and necessary thing?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

ALL Western nations MINUS the U.S.A. have universal health care (public option), NOT "Obamacare". I personally thing the Obama compromise stinks and should be replaced by the public option ASAP.

[-] 1 points by mrbill0626 (33) 13 years ago

Well, from what I know of it, just because all of the other western nations have nationalized health care doesn't mean it would be good for America. I have heard stories, a few about incidences where patients have not been well served by those systems, for example in Canada a few years ago (and I don't know if I have the details exactly correct) but I heard a story of a young lady who died in an ambulance trip that was about 8 hours long to a hospital because they did not have the helicopter medivac system to transport her there faster because of the rationing of health services. And in places like the UK, patients have to wait for long periods sometimes months to get a much needed operation or other service. That's socialized medicine, right? Is that what you want here?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

ALL Western nations MINUS the U.S.A. have universal health care (public option), and I have friends in France, Canada and the UK who've been telling me that they TREASURE their health system. Of course you'll hear the odd "horror story", under ANY system.

[-] 1 points by mrbill0626 (33) 13 years ago

Excuse me, I don't meant to sound dumb, but what is the 'Public option? Can you elaborate somewhat?

[-] 1 points by mrbill0626 (33) 13 years ago

Maybe Dr Paul would support the public potion if he were a practicing physician again as it would eliminate his billing costs conceivably the way it sounds in the description of it. But maybe he is against it because of the cons: http://patients.about.com/od/healthcarereform/a/publicoption_2.htm I don't know, has he said why he is against the public option?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Yes, he did say a bit in his interview with Nader. Do check it out, I believe it's on YouTube.

[-] 1 points by Markmad (323) 13 years ago

Absolutely! AND the first order of business is to go through every single amendment enacted after the privatization of the fed simply because they are unconstitutional. That means stop funding and dismantled all the bilateral institutions created with the sole purpose to bypass the constitution.

[-] 1 points by genanmer (822) 13 years ago

Violence: The Delusion of Justice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FG2JLn1gJk

[-] 1 points by vocalstream (4) 13 years ago

Justice is actually a pretty low rung on the ladder of virtue.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

O VIRTUOUS ONE....

Try explaining that to Jesus, as well as ALL of the Great Jewish Prophets of the Torah.

In fact, ALL of the great religions of humanity AGREE on that point. "Social Justice" is A UNIVERSAL VALUE of mankind, sort of like motherhood, family, the protection of children, peace, etc.

But perhaps motherhood, family, the protection of children and peace are also a little too LOW for your taste on "the ladder of virtue"???

[-] 1 points by vocalstream (4) 13 years ago

Mercy, is a much higher value. Though, justice is important. It's just not enough.

[-] 1 points by Cicero (407) 13 years ago

Just because establish justice occurs before secure the blessings of liberty doesn't mean one was more important to the founders than the other.

Honor thy father and they mother occurs before thou shall not kill in the ten commandments. Does that mean that dishonoring your parents is a more egregious sin than murder? No

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

The point I am trying to get across is that "Social Justice" should NOT be considered a "dirty liberal commie Socialist word" in contemporary America". It certainly wasn't in 1776!

[-] 1 points by Cicero (407) 13 years ago

Oh, I am sorry.

If that is your point then I agree. The founders seeing the inequalities of Europe, the immobility of society, if you were born into the lower class, regardless of your aptitudes, you would probably die in the lower class.

I agree our framers wanted to make a system that was fair and just.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

PRECISELY!!! I couldn't have said it better myself. Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers were profoundly influenced by the values of the Enlightenment, and of course Social Justice was one of them.

[-] 1 points by BeheadedOne (23) from Queens, NY 13 years ago

I don't think the order of priorities is relevant. They're all equally critical and required for the well being and stability of the nation.

The liberty aspect has just been co-opted by the 1% and their right wingnut lapdogs to justify the robbery that they're perpetrating on the rest of us.

Again, the Republican/Conservative MO is to repeat a lie until it becomes the truth in the weak minds of the sheeple.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Agree.

To see how Republicans think - just like trolls! - see my post:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-trolls-think-trollosophy-exposed/

[-] 1 points by BeheadedOne (23) from Queens, NY 13 years ago

Trollosophy!!! ROFLMFAO!!!

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

I think you're reading a little too much into the language of this. They ordered that sentence to make it well-written and appealing, not to establish priorities. At the time, Justice was sorely lacking, so it makes sense to write it first.

[-] -1 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

"They ordered that sentence to make it well-written and appealing".

As if Thomas Jefferson was actually writing a book on stylistics, right??? LMAO

Thanks for the laughs, you just made my day!

("sudoname" was outed as a TROLL ages ago...

To understand HOW TROLLS THINK - if that's not an oxymoron! - go to:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-trolls-think-trollosophy-exposed/

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

You're desperate. You've lost your credibility, just trying to use hate (justice) as a tool.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Hate = justice???????????????????????????????????????????

Would you please explain that in plain English?

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

Justice is mostly about throwing people in jail. Yes, needs to be done for a functional society.

We need to throw the guilty bankers in jail.

But what about promoting the general welfare? That's equally important.

Justice is not #1 priority.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

"Justice is not #1 priority." Thomas Jefferson must be rolling over in his grave.... with indignation or with laughter? Probably BOTH! :)

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

You really think justice is the #1 priority?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Well.... Jesus certainly seemed to think so - along with ALL of the Great Jewish Prophets of the Torah. And the Buddha constantly stressed COMPASSION. Good enough for me!!!

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

Are you saying Buddha what right or wrong?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

NO. I'm saying that ALL of the great religions of humanity AGREE on that point. "Social Justice" is A UNIVERSAL VALUE of mankind, sort of like motherhood, family, the protection of children, peace, etc.

But perhaps, as a TROLL, you are against motherhood, family, the protection of children and peace" ?

NOTE : To understand HOW TROLLS THINK - AND have a GOOD LAUGH while you're at it ! - go to:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-trolls-think-trollosophy-exposed/

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

Replying to below: Where was I outed as a troll? When was "ages ago"?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

As I just wrote, "sudoname", I have NO MORE TIME TO WASTE WITH YOU. Life is too short, besides it's sunny out... So bye bye, my cuddly little muppet...

NOTE : "sudoname" was outed as a TROLL ages ago... To understand HOW TROLLS THINK - AND have a GOOD LAUGH while you're at it ! - go to:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-trolls-think-trollosophy-exposed/

[-] 1 points by sudoname (1001) from Berkeley, CA 13 years ago

Social justice does not equal justice but you are equating the two. Social justice is compassion and equality, justice involves punishment.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

The Founding Fathers were deeply influenced by the values of the Enlightenment (Google "Founding Fathers Enlightenment"), one of which was Social Justice. So "Justice", under the pen of Thomas Jefferson most definitely INCLUDED Social Justice!!!

Anyway, "sudoname", I have NO MORE TIME TO WASTE WITH YOU. Life is too short, besides it's sunny out...

NOTE : "sudoname" was outed as a TROLL ages ago...

To understand HOW TROLLS THINK - AND have a GOOD LAUGH while you're at it !- go to:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-trolls-think-trollosophy-exposed/

[-] 1 points by Cyclops08 (31) from Carlisle, IA 13 years ago

Hmmm. I think we will need to define the "Justice" that you mean. The govt defines justice as law enforcement.

--if you means something else you will have to define what you mean and establish it in a court. The legal guild will come in handy here as all we need is an appropriate lawsuit challenged to a high enough level.

[-] 1 points by JamesS89118 (646) from Las Vegas, NV 13 years ago

ty

PATRIOTISM is a team sport.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

Good point TIOUAISE. And, in perhaps 1891, the courts unjustly gave individual rights to corporations. Since then, it's been getting worse and worse.----

The reason is that the defacto military government in control during the civil war was left in power. The civil war was never formally ended and the defacto government of the north was heavily funded by the british arms manufacturing industries.--

Article 5 is the only way to deal with this, or, the only way to re establish constitutional government. For 140 years we have not had it.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

THANK YOU for that, Christopher and for all your research on Article 5.

"Article 5 is the only way to deal with this, or, the only way to re establish constituional government. For 140 years we have not had it."

That is a CRUCIAL POINT. Have you emailed it to OWS?

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

Actually I don't think they offer that kind of contact. Do you know how to communicate with them?

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Yes, they do offer contact. On this very site, just click their username "occupywallst". But be patient, as they receive hundreds of emails a day...

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

Okay, perhaps others will also contact them sharing this fact.----

"Article 5 is the only way to deal with this, or, the only way to re establish constitutional government. For 140 years we have not had it."

With Article 5, we will dominate wall street, not just occupy it.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Yes, and please send them the EXCELLENT LINKS that you have been posting over the past 3 weeks. Thanks!

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

Okay, here are some of the best.

Efforts to get a skype conference on Article 5 http://www.articlevmeeting.info/

Article V conference, Mark Meckler Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-video comments http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7ikbvu0Y8

Lessig power point on article V http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpbfY-atMk

Lots of facts here about Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html

[-] 0 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 13 years ago

Good post - thank you !

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Thanks - please send the link to your friends.

[-] 0 points by seaglass (671) from Brigantine, NJ 13 years ago

Social Justice isn't socialism.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 13 years ago

Social Justice is a UNIVERSAL VALUE of mankind. In fact, ALL of the great religions EXTOLL Social Justice as a SACRED DUTY. You will find it in Judaism, in Christianity, in Islam, in Buddhism, etc.

The self-proclaimed "Christian Americans" who defend SELFISHNESS as opposed to SHARING do not serve God or Christ at all.... With their lips they may say "Lord, Lord...", but in their hearts they are slaves to Mammon, the ugly God of Money.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 13 years ago

The first priority listed in the Preamble is "to form a more perfect Union".

And WE THE PEOPLE ordained and established the Constitution-not "the government. WE the people were supposed to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

We pawned off all those duties on our "government" and assumed they'd do our job for us. WE the people fell asleep. WE the people elected morons and idiots and trusted them to work in our best interest.

The Constitution is only as powerful and committed as the people that uphold it. It's a document. And "government" is an idea. Justice is a concept that can only be exercised to it's fullest extent when people are fully just.