What would the "ideal" America look like?

[Patriot]

This is an open ended question. What is the 'ideal' America? Did the 'ideal' America ever exist in US history and if so, when?

[UncleVinny]

Gee, way back in grade school they taught us that most Europeans who came here wanted to establish a society that allowed religious freedom! They were fleeing places like England and Italy that allowed only one religion and you were persecuted for any deviation. They were looking for political freedom as well. I wonder, if in their spiritual quest, if they had listened to the ancient wisdom of the Red Man, that perhaps we would have been kinder to the land and its animals, and perhaps we would have dealt in a more civilized way with the Red man himself. The founders of the America Consititution codified the ideal that the state would not show any special preference for any one religion, and would avoid religious persecution.

Vinny bites tongue trying not to make a sarcastic remark!

I'd say then that the ideal American would be aptly be described by the Constitution - that man has certain inalieanble rights - peace, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness, so that would be an American that holds those ideals dear.

[BOLO]

vinny

[BOLO]

This is an open ended question. What is the 'ideal' America? Did the 'ideal' America ever exist in US history and if so, when?

More rhetorical I'd say, than open ended.
Did an Ideal America exist? I suppose if you took statements like "Back in my day" or "In the good old days" you would be led to believe that yes!, indeed an ideal America once existed. Did it really?
A look at History shows us that turmoil was the name of the game no matter what Century, or Decade, or Era.
Wars, Pestilence, Plagues, Depressions, Political Controversy. What the heck. There were problems all along.
As to vinny the stupids remarks. Hog wash vinny. The RED MAN (I probably ought to sue you for denigrating remarks) was no great appreciate of the land any more than any one else. Indian fought Indian for every conceivable purpose including plain old jealousy. They "lived with nature " for the simple reason they had no tools to beat it back with. The White MAN did. (Turnabout is fair play vinny).
Indians would have driven PETA nuts. They used to drive Buffalo off cliffs in large herds, killing as many as two or three hundred at a time. You think they used everything ? Think again. My people were Erie (Iroquois) although they stayed at War with the Iroquois and the Five (Now Six) Nations ( and were almost eliminated (Genocide, ever hear of it vinny the stupid?) some survived becoming Fishermen and damn near fished out the Great Lakes.
So don't hand me that "RED MAN" B.S. vinny, you a$$.
An ideal America to me is one without vinny's or those like him. Which may be true anyway. I never was sure vinny was dyed in the wool.

[Patriot]

UncleVinny said:

I'd say then that the ideal American would be aptly be described by the Constitution - that man has certain inalieanble rights - peace, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness, so that would be an American that holds those ideals dear.

You've conflated the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence. And, the "inalienable rights" you're referring to are not listed as "peace, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness" but rather "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". That changes the ball-game quite a bit. For instance, "life" would connote an absence of abortion, whereas "peace" could be construed as a woman's right to choose. Might I also remind you that those "inalienable rights" are, by the very same document, "endowed by the Creator".

Oh well. We must at least extend credit where it is due, ie, the colorful imagination of liberals who twist and turn American documents to say anything other than what is actually stated.

[UncleVinny]

If you're a liberal it means you have the ability to appreciate the SPIRIT of the law, the ideals embodied by the founders of this nation. That freedom of thinking allows the mind to transcend the letter of the law, to arrive at the higher purpose they were trying to convey.

Liberal = toward Liberty

[Patriot]

Ignorant. That's the word to describe you, Vinny. How can you "appreciate" the spirit of the law when you don't even know the law, and conflate the Declaration with the Constitution? Answer that question, please.

Looks like you've trapped yourself in an eddy of circulus in demonstrando. In your first post you said,

_{I'd say then that the ideal America would be aptly be described by the Constitution.}

Overlooking your identification error of the inalienable rights, I agree. The ideal America would be described by the Constitution. Now you say,

_{That freedom of thinking allows the mind to transcend the letter of the law, to arrive at the higher purpose they were trying to convey.}

In other words, you're above the letter of the law. But guess what, Vinny? Being above the law doesn't embody the spirit of the law or Constitution at all. Essentially you're saying that rules are made to be broken. That's nothing akin to what the Framers had in mind.

You've been caught red-handed in an attempt to re-write not only the letter of the law, but also the spirit of the law.

[Patriot]

Bolo,


Interesting that throughout American history, the crafters of this great nation always looked ahead to "what will be". Suddenly we get here, and realize that it was all in the process of "becoming", that gave the US its ideal quality. Of course you're right that hardship has marked every era.

Still, though, I look back to this with a degree of nostalgia ;D
www.learn-line.nrw.de/angebote/route66/images/ok_corral.jpg [/img]

[BOLO]

Been there. Stood where you stood. Took almost the same picture. A Relative of mine is in Boot hill. Only Johnson there. Innocent man hanged for a crime he did not commit. (No telling how many he did commit)

[UncleVinny]

No I don't consider myself above the law; what I'm saying - and constitutional scholars and judges do the same thing - is that we try to undertand the constitution (and the Bill of Rights, which is part of it) by endeavoring to estimate what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote it.
Even now, when you write something, you don't always have the ability to choose exactly the right words to describe your ideas. Those who wrote that constitution were not perfect in their writing, though the CONCEPTS involved may be closer to perfection. This is what is meant by the SPIRIT of the law they wrote., and judges often are guided by that principle rather than the exact words.

Just like the bible - the whole thrust of the New Testament is that man has a covenant with God, and God's commandment to us is to "Love one another, as I have loved you." So the SPIRIT of those words are that we are brothers, that we are family, that we should love one another. So when one (p)resident says, let's hate gays, lets bomb Arabs, that runs counter to the spirit of the NT principles, even if there are no exact words there about gays or Arabs. I KNOW you're smart enough to appreciate what I'm saying. It's only one small step from that realization to see how wrong we are as a nation to be killing people and advocating hatred.

[Patriot]

Ignorant. That's the word to describe you, Vinny. How can you "appreciate" the spirit of the law when you don't even know the law, and conflate the Declaration with the Constitution? Answer that question, please.

Looks like you've trapped yourself in an eddy of circulus in demonstrando. In your first post you said,


^{I'd say then that the ideal America would be aptly be described by the Constitution.}


Overlooking your identification error of the inalienable rights, I agree. The ideal America would be described by the Constitution. Now you say,


^{That freedom of thinking allows the mind to transcend the letter of the law, to arrive at the higher purpose they were trying to convey.}


In other words, you're above the letter of the law. But guess what, Vinny? Being above the law doesn't embody the spirit of the law or Constitution at all. Essentially you're saying that rules are made to be broken. That's nothing akin to what the Framers had in mind.

You've been caught red-handed in an attempt to re-write not only the letter of the law, but also the spirit of the law.

[UncleVinny]

Ohh, I like that term "red handed!" Filled with multiple meanings and inuendo, ha, ha!

Ahh, don't be so defensive, my little grasshopper!
Truth is that's the way judges handle the evolving law of our land, by interperting the constitution, and yes even the motives behind the framers of that document.

[Patriot]

Vinny writes,

^{...don't be so defensive, my little grasshopper!}

Looks like he's now reverting to ad hominem to compound his fallacy of circulus in demonstrando. Does anyone beside me feel that this individual just doesn't have the answers?

^{...judges handle the evolving law of our land, by interperting the constitution, and yes even the motives behind the framers of that document.}

Only in the Supreme Court. And you are not a Supreme Court Justice by any means. You are about as ignorant as they come. Scroll back and answer the questions posed to you in this thread, without invoking a further fallacy, namely, an appeal to authority.

[UncleVinny]

I did give my answer to the original question. What is it that I did not answer?

Meanwhile, let me digress for a spell. The 'grasshopper' terms comes from the East where spiritual masters would refer to their students as grasshoppers. In the West, much of the Eastern beliefs have migrated. You have heard, I'm sure of the 7 chakras, the points in the spine where energy flows. The advanced soul will have 'activated' the higher chakras of the heart (love) throat (words, communication) and crown (enlightenment). But look at the photo recently posted. Cowboys and guns, and Texans with big belt buckles. These images connote the spirit of the lowest energies - the first chakra, near the anus for primary needs of life, the second the sexual organs. Why the cowboys have not even reached the level of the third Solar Plexus chakra - with all their focus on guns and the belt area - surely you can see how primitive this is. You might even recognize the symbolism of Texas being the lowest point in the nation, the area for guns and oil, while the blue states are at the top, eastward facing. Ah, yes, grasshopper, there is so much to learn! Ha, ha!

[Vagrant]

An arguement about the 'babarity' of Americans based on Buddhist teaching of the chakra? Wow, Vinny you're getting weak in your old age.