blog Time Hath Found Us: July 2005

July 28, 2005

Is American Bioethics Lost in the Woods?

From the April, 2005 issue of PLoS Medicine - a peer reviewed, open access medical journal from the Public Library of Science.

Is American Bioethics Lost in the Woods?

Michael Cook

The debate between a libertarian bioethicist and a communitarian bioethicist [1] illustrates why American bioethics is becoming increasingly marginalised and irrelevant to the democratic society that it intends to serve.

Both participants in the debate, Arthur Caplan and Carl Elliott, explicitly reject the notion of “human nature” as a foundation for bioethics. But without human nature, on what grounds can advances in biomedical knowledge be called good or bad, right or wrong, or even harmful or beneficial? Clearly Caplan and Elliott have to accept something as a touchstone of their bioethical discourse, or it will lapse into windy incoherence. Although they approach it from different angles, this benchmark is informed consent, with Elliott placing the stress on “informed” and Caplan on “consent”.

As a result, their lively disagreement over enhancement technology is just verbal sparring and not a battle of ideas. Caplan believes that the consumer-patient is sufficiently mature to weigh up the dangers; Elliott is more sceptical. Neither appears to think that it makes any sense to argue that technology should be suited to human nature. This belief seems to be widespread in the bioethics community. Ruth Macklin, a bioethicist at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, argued recently, for instance, that “human dignity” is an empty and meaningless concept [2].

However, academic discourse has failed to dislodge from the heads of the hoi polloi the conviction that the starting point of ethics is not consent but happiness. The man in the street, the ultimate consumer of bioethics, still believes in human nature. The notion that human dignity is meaningless would be regarded by nearly all Americans as not merely absurd but reprehensible.

What I find odd in the writings of many bioethicists is that they skirt around the question that the average person wants to ask: will this enhancement make me happy in a deeply satisfying and fulfilling way? He or she is much less interested in whether all the boxes on the informed consent form have been ticked properly.

Consequently, as the Caplan–Elliott bunfight demonstrates, bioethicists are now reduced to arguing that human enhancement is good if people want it—even if they want it mainly because powerful commercial interests have persuaded them to, even if it is weird and kinky, even if it won't make them happy. Elliott's fascinating book Better than Well [3] is evidence that exercising a right to enhancement still leaves many lives hollow and unhappy. Sooner or later people will ask why they hadn't been warned, and a lot of bioethicists will be looking for jobs.

Michael Cook
Australasian Bioethics Information
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
E-mail: mcook @ australasianbioethics . org


Competing Interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.

Published: April 26, 2005

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020121

Copyright: © 2005 Michael Cook. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Citation: Cook M (2005) Is American Bioethics Lost in the Woods? PLoS Med 2(4): e121

Cross posted at Truth and Action

ACLU Sues to Use Koran in Court Room Oath

On July 26th the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the state of North Carolina to try to have the Koran used for the swearing in of witnesses in state courts. The irony of this is self evident.

NewsMax has the story:
"We hope that the court will issue a ruling that the phrase 'holy scripture' includes the Quran, Old Testament and Bhagavad-Gita in addition to the Christian Bible," said Jennifer Rudinger, executive director of the ACLU of North Carolina.

Why stop there, Jennifer? In my youth, I knew people whose sacred texts were the writings of Carlos Casteneda. How about L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics? The sky's the limit!

The obvious logical conclusion to this scenario is that if North Carolina loses, the next item on the ACLU agenda would be to remove the Bible from the courtrooms. After all separation of church and state, right?
Denying the use of other religious texts would violate the Constitution by favoring Christianity over other religions, the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina said in its lawsuit.

Read more about the ACLU's Hypocritical Anti-Christian Attacks.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst! If you would like to join us, register at the Protest The ACLU Portal. You will be added to our mailing list and emailed further instructions.

July 27, 2005

A Friend in Need

Our friend, ChristmasGhost, from the Stop The ACLU blogburst has an urgent request for help in locating a missing teen.

This is a photo of Cheryl Ann Magner. She has been missing since the beginning of June. She was last seen in Marin County, Ca.

Please, anyone who has seen this 17 year old girl please call 415-472-2994. This is her mother's phone number...please do not call unless you have information that would be helpful.

Or call the San Rafael police dept. @ 415-485-3000 or
Any information or help would be greatly appreciated by the family.

Mt. Soledad War Memorial Cross Saved, for the Moment

Yesterday voters of the City of San Diego voted overwhelmingly to save the Mt. Soledad War Memorial Cross by transferring it to the U.S. Interior Department as a national veterans memorial. Although the ballot measure to save the cross required a two-thirds majority to pass, the final vote count shows that the measure passed with a staggering 75.9%. Nevertheless, the 16 year battle over the cross is not over. In a San Diego Union-Tribune article:
Attorney James McElroy, whose client filed a lawsuit challenging the presence of the cross on city land in 1989, called the vote meaningless.

"It still doesn't mean a damn thing," he said. "Voters should have never voted on it. It's a waste of taxpayers' money."


"I think they've acknowledged this is the last chance to save the cross," McElroy said. "And when the court tells them this is not going to work, what else have they got?"

Charles LiMandri, an attorney for the Thomas More Law Center, which fights for Christian ideals in court, said a legal battle will last for years.

"This is going to be going on past our lifetimes," said LiMandri, 49. "This culture war isn't going to end. . . . We see this as a bigger battle. We're fighting for the minds, hearts and souls of America."

There are already two court dates scheduled for August. On August 12, a Superior Court hearing is set to examine the ballot measure's constitutionality. On August 15, a federal judge will hear other cross related arguments.

"And when the court tells them this is not going to work, what else have they got?" This is the mindset of the American Taliban - remember the ancient statues of Buddha blown up in Afghanistan. In their opinion, courts trump the will of the people. Their motto very well might be: There is no god but no-god, death to the infidels.

Global War on Terror Goes All Mushy on Us

According to the International Herald Tribune, the Bush administration thinks it is time to change the phrase "the global war on terror." Instead, the new term will be "a global struggle against violent extremism." Has the NEA infiltrated the Defense Department? It sounds like something Stuart Smalley would come up with. I say the phrase should be changed to "The Kick Their Sorry Butts Into Next Week Campaign."

Let's call it "a global struggle against violent extremism."
It's sooo much nicer than that nasty war word.

July 26, 2005

New Template

If you've been here before, then you noticed that I've changed the template. The old one was too dark and cramped. The new template is based on a Wordpress template named "Beeblebrox" and sizes to fit your screen. Overall the new look is much easier on the eyes.

Thanks for visiting.

July 24, 2005

Microsoft Files Patent for Smiley Emoticons

From ZDNet UK,
"Patents were ultimately designed to benefit society — to have companies disclose things that benefit society which they wouldn't otherwise disclose. Who does this patent benefit?"

C'mon punk, make my day. Come and get me.

July 22, 2005

California Attorney General Displays Anti-American Graffiti

California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, has crossed the line. Lockyer along with the California Arts Council has sponsored an anti-American, anti-military, anti-Christian and anti-Semitic "art" exhibit on display in the California Department of Justice building. By the way, the exhibit was paid for by the tax paying citizens of California.

Among the "art" displayed is a picture depicting the US Capitol Building being blown up with an image of a hooded Abu Graib prisoner, arms outstretched in a Christ-like pose complete with a red halo around his head. Another is an image of the continental United States painted with American Flag stars and stripes being flushed down a toilet.

A press release by states:
(SACRAMENTO) – California’s top law enforcement officer, Attorney General Bill Lockyer, has set off a firestorm by showcasing anti-American, anti-military, anti-Christian and anti-Semitic artwork in the California Department of Justice building.

“A Creative Merger: Lawyers & Artists” exhibit features a number of offensive, anti-American exhibits including a U.S. flag in the shape of the continental United States being flushed down a toilet. Pictures from the exhibit can be found at the website for Move America Forward (website:, a pro-troop, non-profit organization that is organizing a counter-exhibit showcasing patriotic artwork.

The exhibit is sponsored by a taxpayer funded entity (the California Arts Council) and California’s top law enforcement officer, Attorney General Bill Lockyer. Lockyer is listed as an official sponsor of the event according to a press release issued on July 12, 2005 by the California Arts Council (a taxpayer-funded entity).

The news release quotes Lockyer as saying:

“It is an honor to co-host this powerful exhibit and display the talent of our legal community,” Lockyer said. “Creative expression stimulates freedom of thought, appreciation for diversity and opens new windows onto the world in which we live. The collected works of these fine artists – and lawyers – achieve these worthwhile objectives with style and beauty.”

A copy of the press release citing Lockyer’s sponsorship of the exhibit along with the sponsorship of the taxpayer-funded Californa Arts Council is available at the Move America Forward website ( is responding with a Pro-American response to the vile propaganda displayed in the California Capitol. Click HERE for details.

Hat Tip: Caoilfhionn from Cao's Blog.

July 20, 2005

NOW's Backgrounder on Roberts - What They're REALLY Saying

My good friend Juleni from Truth and Action forwarded this email from the National Organization for Women (NOW). It is the first pathetic attempt at Borking the new nominee to the Supreme Court - John Roberts.

I've taken a swipe at translating the reality challenged rantings of the NOW email in the tradition of MAD Magazine.

What NOW is really saying about John Roberts:

Throughout his 26-year career, John G. Roberts has continually supported and promoted an anti-woman, anti-civil rights, and anti-worker agenda. [This guy's a chauvinisticly racist capitalist pig!] NOW opposed his nomination to U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 2003 [Duh!] on these grounds and will continue to do so to protect the lives of all women and girls in the U.S. [Except for all those girls we like to abort, especially the poor ones]

Among our many concerns, Roberts actively opposes Roe v. Wade and wrote several amicus briefs while a Deputy Solicitor General. [Can you believe it? He actually said those baby girls we love to abort have the so-called "right" to be born.] In one case where Roe was not even at issue, his brief offered gratuitously: [And you KNOW how we feel about gratuitous briefs!] "Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled." He also wrote a brief in a case NOW brought against Operation Rescue in our effort to stop violent blockades [Everybody knows those followers of Jesus are so violent with their signs and hymns! We were soooo offended! We'll take those nice boys from Hamas any day.] at abortion clinics. His brief and oral [Get it -- brief and oral? He is such a, a man :-( ] argument supported Operation Rescue, and argued that the blockades were merely an expression of opposition to abortion. [And not the sexist attacks of the theocracy! Can you even believe it?] The Court's failure to protect women and clinics from these attacks helped us pass the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act the following year. [Bray, et al. v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, et al.] [We showed them who has the cajones around here!]

In 2001, Roberts filed an amicus brief in Adarand v. Mineta, supporting a challenge to federal affirmative action programs. He also argued against Title IX, the equal educational opportunity law for women and girls as applied to college athletic programs in NCAA v. Smith. [That's right, he hates minorities and women]

While in private law practice [Roberts has even had the unmitigated gall to work in the private sector!], Roberts served as lead counsel for Toyota in Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. [An eeeeevil corporation.] v. Williams, in which he argued to limit the protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The case involved a woman fired after asking Toyota for accommodations to do her job after being diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome. The court ruled that while this condition impaired her ability to work, it did not impair her ability to perform a major life activity, and thus was not protected by the ADA. [Since when is a typing CAREER not a MAJOR LIFE ACTIVITY? You would think they were talking some menial "job" like raising children.]

He is also member of the Federalist Society, an [eeeevil] ultra-conservative organization committed to returning to a pre-Civil War era [See he supports slavery!] of unquestioned states' rights and rolling back legislation that has advanced women's rights, civil rights, environmental protections and health and safety standards. [That's right, he loves slavery, he hates women, he is a racist pig, he drinks pollution for breakfast and he wants everybody to get sick and break every bone in their body.] Federalist Society heroes and leaders you might recognize are Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia [white pig] and Clarence Thomas [Uncle Tom black pig], former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft [Christian BushHitlerite pig] and Sen. Orrin Hatch [Mormon pig] (R-Utah).

The character [whatever that means] and record of anyone nominated to our nation's highest court must be thoroughly reviewed and considered by the Senate [our useful idiots] in their important "advice and consent" role. The Senate must be certain the nominee can discern between personal conviction [whatever that is] and interpretation of the law as they balance the interpretation of our Constitution and our democracy's promise to protect and expand the civil liberties [That's right, expand them real big. After all, the Constitution was supposed to give the government the power to grant the little people rights, except the white pigs that wrote it got it all wrong.] of all people, not just the privileged few. John Roberts does not meet those standards [whatever that means].

What, me worry?

July 16, 2005

Support Democracy in Iraq - Petition

Elisa and Gary over at Boxer Watch have created a petition to counter Barbara Boxer's Iraq Pullout Timetable.

Senator Boxer is circulating a petition demanding a "strategy" and a "timetable" for the mission in Iraq. At the time of this posting, 35,352 people have signed her petition.

We need to make sure that President Bush hears the OTHER side - our support for his efforts to promote democracy in the Middle East in a realistic way.

Let you voice be heard. Sign the Boxer Watch Petition.

July 14, 2005

Conflict of Interest - Florida Supreme Court Helped Fund ACLU

There is nothing wrong in Florida. After all, Terri Schindler-Schiavo was legally allowed to die a noble death. County probate judge George Greer, her, the fearless judge, was given the equivalent of a lifetime achievement award by the St. Petersburg Bar Association two years in a row.

Be that as it may, The Center for Reclaiming America published an article by Sam Kastensmidt on July 7, 2005 detailing how the Florida Supreme Court knowingly and purposely helped fund ACLU operations in Florida between 1990 and 1997.

The Center for Reclaiming America for Christ has uncovered documents revealing that the Florida Supreme Court is responsible for helping to fund the ACLU of Florida — using interest from legal trust funds generated by unsuspecting home buyers, heirs, and legal awards and settlements. Between 1990 and 1997, the Florida Bar Foundation (FBF), a creation of the Florida Supreme Court, provided more than $600,000 to help pay the salary of the ACLU of Florida’s legal director.

Incredibly, the Florida Supreme Court approved these appropriations, despite the fact that the Court often issues rulings in cases argued by the ACLU’s legal director. One would assume that such funding would create a conflict of interest — but not in the eyes of the Court. In a letter faxed to the Center, the FBF admitted that every instance in which it offered funding to the ACLU of Florida, it was “specifically approved from time to time by the Supreme Court of Florida.”
The citizens of Florida deserve better. The ACLU of Florida claims that it does “not receive any government funding” and that it is “funded entirely with private donations, foundation grants, court-awarded legal fees and membership dues.”

However, the truth is that the ACLU has used the government (the Florida Supreme Court) to operate a multi-million dollar foundation which strips monies from unsuspecting Floridians so that it can fund legal efforts to oppose common sense legislation passed by the elected representatives of those same unsuspecting citizens.
To view the Florida Bar Foundation's records of grants awarded to the ACLU of Florida, please click here.

Outrageous is too tame a word. Read the entire article HERE.

Hat Tip: Hi. How YOU doin'?


This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. To join us go to our Protest The ACLU Portal and register. If you have any problems email Jay at You will be added to our mailing list, and recieve further instruction from there. It is quite simple.

July 13, 2005

The Supreme Court and Moral Anarchy


WASHINGTON, D.C., July 12, 2005 ( – “What does the nomination of a replacement for Sandra Day O’Connor, constitutional law, and moral chaos have to do with one another? A good deal more than you think.”

So writes Robert Bork, a former judge on the U.S Court of Appeals, in what is arguably one of the clearest and most timely expositions of the fundamental abuses which plague the institution of the Supreme Court. “Their Will Be Done”, printed in the Wall Street Journal on July 10, calls into question the entire legal, social, and moral philosophy under which the Supreme Court has been operating, pointing out the grave abuses of power by that court, and highlighting the immediate necessity of a return to faithfulness to the Constitution, lest the United States be completely fragmented by the Court’s destructive moral anarchy.

“The struggle over the Supreme Court is not just about law,” prophesies Bork, “it is about the future of our culture.”

According to Bork the very foundation upon which the United States was built, including and especially its “body of common moral assumptions” is being destroyed by the “liberationist spirit of our times.” This ‘liberationist spirit’ is that which believes that “in moral matters, each man is a separate sovereignty,” which, Bork argues calling for support from Alexis de Tocqueville, ultimately destroys the very basis for a society. And it is the Supreme Court, in its present form, as little more than the left’s “political weapon”, which is the most powerful and most outspoken advocate of that destructive spirit.

“When [the Supreme Court] rules in the name of the Constitution, whether it rules truly or not, the court is the most powerful branch of government in domestic policy,” writes Bork. “The combination of absolute power, disdain for the historic Constitution and philosophical incompetence is lethal.”

Not content to simply make sweeping statements, Bork backs up his assertions with a thorough list of the Court’s abuses of power and their poor moral philosophizing, mentioning, amongst other things, the court’s unconstitutional support of child pornography, gay ‘rights’, abortion ‘rights’ and its whittling away at religious freedom in the name of ‘tolerance’.

“Whatever one may think of these outcomes as matters of policy, not one is authorized by the Constitution, and some are directly contrary to it,” says Bork.

At a time when conservatives across the country are crossing their fingers that their president will stay true to his professed desire to restore a culture of life, Bork’s article further highlights just how vital and necessary Bush’s resolve is. “To restore the court’s integrity will require a minimum of three appointments of men and women who have so firm an understanding of the judicial function that they will not drift left once on the bench…That will be difficult, but the stakes are the legitimate scope of self-government and an end to judicially imposed moral disorder.”

In filling at least one, and possibly two Supreme Court vacancies, president Bush will have the opportunity to prove himself to his supporter base as being fully committed to the cause of life. If he should fail to restore the court’s integrity, however, he will be responsible for plunging his nation further into disunity, and pushing it further into the mire of moral relativism.

Read “Their Will be Done” by Robert Bork.

(c) Copyright: is a production of Interim Publishing.
Cross Posted from: Truth and Action

July 07, 2005

No Panic, Just Resolve

Thomas Lifson has posted a stirring article at The American Thinker about today's London terror bombings. I too shared his emotions of anger followed by a quiet pride of sharing a common culture with the likes of the indefatigable Brits.

Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern, and western quarters.
– al Qaeda website, as reported by the BBC

Waking up to the awful news that terrorists have attacked rush hour commuters in London, my immediate reactions are horror and deep, deep anger. Innocent men, women, and children have been blown apart, hideously maimed, and traumatized physically and mentally. In numbers unknown, but surely significant.

But after coffee and reflection, a second wave of emotion swept over me. An odd comfort and pride in the reaction of the Londoners and the British. Like their countrymen in the World War II Blitz bombing, the Brits are made of tough fabric. They have lived through Nazi attacks and the IRA terror bombings of two decades ago.

They do not run about the streets screaming, wailing, looting, or in any way panicked. Some of those at the blasts may be in shock. But that is quite a different matter than panic. They are being attended to, receiving medical attention and the all-purpose British remedy, a hot cuppa tea.

Read the entire article, No panic today.

We Are All Londoners

In response to today's terror bombing in London. We the people of the United States and people of good will everywhere stand shoulder to shoulder with our friends in London. Our prayers go out for your dead and wounded. We steel our hearts more than ever to stand against evil and to defeat it at every meeting.

Announcing the Grand Opening of

I would like to welcome you all to the grand opening of our brand new site Stop The ACLU.Com! Make sure to change your links. We are devoted to exposing the radical agenda of the most dangerous organization in America, the ACLU. We are the official blog of Stop The ACLU.Org and we will do our best to keep you informed of the anti-American activities of the ACLU and their socialist agenda for America. In order to further expose the ACLU we want YOU to get involved with us. We do a weekly blogburst every Thursday. Go here to join us. We have over 80 sites that blog with us every Thursday on the evils of the ACLU. We will also be featuring a blogburst of the week from which a blogburst of the month will be chosen. The blogburst of the month will win free stuff from our Bulldoze The ACLU Store.

Speaking of free stuff....In celebration of the grand opening of our new site we are holding a contest today! Our friend Cao has been generous enough to sponsor today's Caption Contest. The winner will recieve one item of their choice from our Bulldoze The ACLU Store. Go to Stop The ACLU to join the contest.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. To join us go to our Protest The ACLU Portal and register. If you have any problems email me at You will be added to our mailing list, and recieve further instruction from there. It is quite simple.

July 04, 2005

Declaration of Independence (circa 2005)

On this Fourth of July, it is fitting to reflect on the ideas and ideals upon which the United States was founded. In deciding what to post as a tribute to our Founding Fathers I re-read the Declaration of Independence. The document was originally written in 1776 in response to the injustices of England's King and Parliament.

In reading this venerable document, I was struck by how America today is suffering very similar circumstances. It occurred to me that by changing just a few specific nouns and pronouns, a new and very relevant Declaration of Independence is formed. An American Declaration of Independence which is entirely fitting for the patriots of 2005.

A Declaration of Independence from judicial tyranny
July 4, 2005

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies this nation; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] Supreme Court of the United States is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has They have refused his their Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has They have forbidden his our Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his their Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has they have utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass They have refused to let stand other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has They have called together legislative judicial bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his their measures.

He has They have dissolved [laws duly passed by] Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his effeminate hysteria their invasions on the rights of the people.

He has They have refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has They have endeavoured to prevent encourage the [over]population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization Immigration of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage discourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has They have obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary duly passed by Legislative powers.

He has They have made Judges dependent on his their Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has They have erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.

He has They have kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies [of Lawyers] without the consent of our legislatures.

He has They have affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power [and subject to Judicial power].

He has They have combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his their Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops ACLU attorneys among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has They have abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his their Protection and waging War against us.

He has They have plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is They are at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries Laws to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has They have constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas in Federal Court to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has They have excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Secular Humanist Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince Group whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler sit in judgment of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British Judicial brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature fiat to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of these Colonies United States, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies States are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown Supreme Court of the United States, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain Supreme Court of the United States, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Gentle reader, in the spirit of the visionaries of the past, I invite you to endorse the ideals of freedom by adding your name along with your state, province or country to the comments of this post. Do this in rememberance of those brave souls who supported the original "with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

Cross posted at Truth and Action