|
|
COMMENTS:
I hope that people notice that the constitution that is currently being destroyed (American) is based on inalienable rights and Common Law, while the constitution that is being created (European) is based on Civil Law where our rights are granted to us by enormous organisations (so long as you don't do, say or think anything that is against the union's "general interest".
I don't know enough about it to even comment
Does it matter what I believe?
It's not going to happen.
I have not read the proposed constitution yet so alas I cannot comment. I do hope you were being sarcastic with your ballot and that the aforementioned points are not actually part of the real constitution. You see I wouldn't be all that surprised if they were. Afterall we now live in a European Union where the even smallest detail i.e. the shape of a banana is decided by the Union.
May God help us all as he continues to help himself.
by B_P on Wed Feb 02, 05 9:20am
[+]
Fingers crossed, wolf nipple chips.
A Brief History of Civil and Common Law
As far as modern times are concerned, Civil Law originated chiefly from the Roman Empire. For this reason it is sometimes called Roman Law. This philosophy spread over continental Europe and, in the Eighteenth Century, the Civil Law ravaged France in what became known as the Reign of Terror. Today, born of its past and present geographical sway, Civil Law is also known as European Law.
Common Law has its roots in antiquity. Some believe it to have originated from the divine law of statutes and judgements given to the Israelites by Moses. Whatever its origins, it was brought across Europe and to Britain by the Anglo-Saxons. It was a law common to all those peoples and hence became known as Anglo-Saxon Common Law. In Europe Civil Law was the legacy of the later Roman Empire, but England remained free of this influence and thus the Anglo-Saxon Common Law eventually came to be called English Common Law.
English Common Law was seriously compromised during the Norman Conquest which brought over the European Civil Law and imposed that system on Britain under the name of Feudalism. However, after long and bloody centuries, rights and freedoms were gradually won back and restored. Perhaps the primary and most notable date of this period is AD 1215 when the Magna Carta was signed - a document that is still held to be binding today as an important part of the British Constitution.
The Framers of the Constitution of the United States drew heavily upon Common Law when drawing up that remarkable freedom document. William E. Gladstone (1809-98), the British Prime Minister, was so impressed with the US Constitution that he said it was "the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man". American freedom drew many of its constituent parts from English Common Law. Ireland, Malta, Australia, Canada and New Zealand also adopted (to some degree) the English Common Law in the founding of their own governments. The same cannot be said for Europe.
Hehehe. Old Europe just ain't what it used to be. (You can say the same about the U.S.)
This makes me wonder what their general interest really is.
I do hope you were being sarcastic with your ballot and that the aforementioned points are not actually part of the real constitution.
B P
They are really part of the EU constitution, B P.
I would just like to point out that B_P's point about 'banana shape' is apocryphal.
Like anything that us new, people will dear it.
On the whole, the EU benefits much more than it denies.
Shame that the Daily Mail reading class can't see beyond the hyperbole.
Steelhamster.
Did you not create a ballot called "Do you believe in the US constitution, in which you implicitly criticised the Bush regime for being unconstitutional for locking up terror suspects without trial? How can you defend both the European and American constitutions when they embody two seperate philosophies?
I am all for more European integration, its just a shame that living in the UK, we still have that island mentality in some, and some still cant let go of the fact that we dont run the world anymore and find it galling that Johnny Foreigner may be taking away their sovereignty.
Time for some to grow up and realise we live in a global village and that integration is on the whole a good thing and not something to be feared as the Tory press would have us believe.
by Steelhamster on Jan 29, 2005
Steelhamster uses the term "global village" to describe the world community. Try typing it into a search engine and seeing what NWO bullshit comes out.
Here's some bullshit I found on the internet that Steelhamster obviously wants to see come about.
The Bilderberg and the New World Order:
As far as global politics and finance go, the Bilderberg is the top of the pyramid, the all-seeing eye gazing upon the construction of a New World Order . This one-world system of governance, lurking in the shadows cast by flowery language about our new "global village," will transfer nearly all economic and political power into the hands of a small group of the world elite.
Watch Steelhamster.
This sounds like a constitution written by the Bush Administration. You can do anything you want, unless we disagree or it doesn't benefit us financially.
Or to paraphrase an old American phrase, popular in the 1920's: You can buy a Model T in any color you want--as long as it's black.
Saying that you have freedom, unless the government decides to take it away is the same as saying you have no freedoms at all.
I'm not european, but given that americans will be the ones dying to liberate europe if all this goes wrong (which it looks like it will) I'd have to vote against it, as much as most europeans have earned such a government it's not fair to place this burden on future americans.
Who's on the fast track to fascism?
What if those "future Americans" are left-wingers, her-blog?
|
|
