Not a single one of these legalistic, fair-weathered constitutionalists understand the actual meaning of ‘constitution’ or ‘principle’ or ‘natural right/law.’ They think it has to do with pieces of paper and legalities, because the meanings of these words have been twisted over time.
[Word magic. Propaganda.]
Their specific discipline has their own shop talk (‘legalese’) which they try to enforce on others. Communication doesn’t work that way. It’s a two-way street. Otherwise, its not civil, mutual communication, but force – violence.
What do these words really describe, from the time written? Principles refer to the realities at play. Inherent to human nature. Not philosophical concepts, political ideas, or legal precedents.
The word ‘constitution’ is in reference to the people and their nature, and the piece of paper we call ‘the Constitution’ is a description of said nature with instructions to the corporate (body, nation) caretakers on how to work with said nature in order to keep a coherent society (body, nation). An instructive manual, if you will.
Violating the principles of human nature always leads to bad things – just like Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and Communist China. Fact. The Constitution (piece of paper) provides specific warning to this fact – particularly the Bill of Rights.
No legal arguments nullify nature. Nor can they prevent the results of ill-advised uses of force.
Human nature includes reactionary, natural principles – just like science. Apply force and there will be an opposite and equal reaction. A complementary and predictable result. It is the aim of these legal minds to apply force in contrary to human nature and cause inequitable and unnatural results. This is why what they say never matches the results they reap. And it is deliberate.
Meanwhile, the average man doesn’t realize that they are being manipulated to react using twisted language. The only way to set this matter straight is to realize the language differences being used, and not react to it (unpredictable).
Commonly termed ‘civil disobedience’ but the connotation to this has also been twisted to include willful, predictable, reactionary measures just using non-violence. It actually means to not react at all (unpredictable). You go about your business as if nothing has been mandated. As if no force had been applied.
Folks have already been self-distancing because they don’t want to get sick themselves or spread it to their loved ones. As a hedge basically, even though the science and numbers (here and in South Korea, for example) show that 96-98% of the deaths have nothing to do with the Wuhan virus whatsoever. It only reveals the illnesses already in the population (like the seasonal flu, and other conditions).
I think folks should keep doing what they are doing, and ignore ‘mandates.’ Not react at all, and continue using their best judgment taking the government advisories as just that – advice. Just as they have been.
All this ban does is apply force (literally) and illicit an equal and opposite reaction which will make matters worse, and put more people in harms way (kill more folks). Fact. Cooper knows this, and he intended this. He is a tyrant, and a stupid one. And all these legal retards are defending him. I wish they weren’t so blind, but they have been miseducated beyond help.
Nature rules, and always wins. Every time. Fact. Man and our irrelevant arguments be damned. The only reason to have the conversations is to remind and warn. But even reminders (like from a loving spouse) can be taken as ‘hen-pecking’ and have detrimental effects.
[Egos, expectations and rumors.]
At some point – if enough folks don’t recognize what natural law and principles *really* are – communications (free speech) will become impossible (ineffectual).
How ‘We the People’ respond to this situation will dictate the outcome. ‘We’ are Nature. ‘We’ are ‘in control’ whether we realize it or not.
[May God help us.]