http://www.phillynews.com/inquirer/2000/Feb/29/sj/JDECLARE29.htm

N.J. Senate drops Declaration bill

Public school students would have had to say it daily. In a fiery speech, one senator called the historic document exclusionary.

By Eugene Kiely

INQUIRER TRENTON BUREAU

Alicia Ortiz and her classmates at a Jersey City charter school went to Trenton yesterday in a show of support for a bill that would require New Jersey public-school students to recite part of the Declaration of Independence daily.

But during the debate on the bill in the state Senate, the 11-year-old student found herself cheering as State Sen. Wayne Bryant (D., Camden) attacked the Declaration of Independence as exclusionary, and its author, Thomas Jefferson, as a racist slave owner who never considered blacks or women his equals, despite his lofty rhetoric about equality.

"I thought it was a good idea, but now I'm not sure," Alicia said of the legislation.

Like Alicia, at least two senators changed their minds on the bill, which was expected to pass but was pulled from the floor by its Republican sponsor after nearly two hours of debate when it become clear that it did not have the 21 votes needed.

In a fiery speech, Bryant thundered that the Declaration of Independence's claim of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was an affront to his slave ancestors. He pleaded with his colleagues not to divide New Jersey's classrooms by forcing students to relive slavery.

"I would never allow my grandchildren to stand in class and repeat these words," Bryant said. "It's another way of being exclusionary, unfeeling, insensitive to a large majority of the population."

Sen. Gerald Cardinale (R., Bergen), the bill's prime sponsor, disagreed. "They are trying to make it a racial issue," said Cardinale, one of the Senate's leading conservatives. "I don't see this as a black-white issue."

He said it was not Bryant's words but Democratic threats that prevented the bill from passing.

Cardinale said he had 22 votes when the debate began, but two senators - including the bill's only Democratic cosponsor - got word to him during the debate that they could not vote for the bill. He said both were threatened by Democrats to have the issue used against them in the black community during the 2001 campaign. ...

-- Markus Archus (apxov@mail.com), February 29, 2000

Answers

It's times like this that makes me feel there is very little hope left for this country...

-- Chris Tisone (c_tisone@hotmail.com), February 29, 2000.

Got guns and ammo?

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), February 29, 2000.

Now we wouldn't want to be known as "politically in-correct" by standing up for the Declaration of Independence would we?

Whats the opposite of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Think about it.

-- ~***~ (~***~@earth.ebe), February 29, 2000.

I have a truck and a gun. One day I am going to drive somewhere. And many others will drive to this same place. And we will stand. And then others will drive to other places and stand there.

Then it will all be blamed on the Christians and decapitation will begin.

Remember the Alamo!!!

-- Merlot (Merlot@cost.com), February 29, 2000.

...and then, after we abolish the D of I, we can trim "just a couple" of the more pesky amendments to the Constitution...maybe part of the 1st (the one on religion...and freedom of assembly) and gosh, who needs the 2nd? or the 4th for that matter...and geez, the 10th is totally outmoded, right?

-- John Galt (still@doom.er), February 29, 2000.

It's so very sad that there are people who would inject race into just about anything and everything. Their very existence must be a bitter pill for them to swallow.

Do they really believe that the Declaration of Independence is unjust and racist as it is interpreted today? Was it written by saints or God-like faultless people in a utopian society? If they weren't flawless should we discard it then? Should it's meaning and signifigance be stricken from our society and culture?

Why are these people (state senators on this occasion) so angry?

Are these the kind of people who who would scream out, " I demand justice and I will not rest until I possess it."

What if justice was delivered? What form would it be in? And what then? Would another past grievance be brought forth to parade under the noses of the red white and blue? And another and then another. Ad infintum?

That document didn't enslave them it was instrumental in setting them free because it has survived and its principles had thrived for almost 90 years.

Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. And those who wallow in it will be sucked under and they'll never make it to the shore for their place in the sun.

-- Light upon the shore (freedom@common-sense.together), February 29, 2000.

So the Democrats are exploiting racism now? Threatening fellow Democrats with racist comments? With (more) hate speech from the black comunity?

What, again?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), February 29, 2000.

Are these people insane??????????? That is my question. That, and "What the HELL is going on here?"

Right now I am finding it hard to catch my breath. I didn't think I was simple minded, but I really don't understand. Maybe someone could explain this kind of thinking to me. I lived in NJ for 2 years (86-88). Never did understand them. Help me out here, folks. Is it me or are "they" the alien species? How in the name of all that is holy did the Declaration of Independence become a racial issue? Is this disease apt to spread to the rest of us? How much time do we have, or is it too late already? Where's my gun?

-- Juniper (silverfox@milfordnet.com), February 29, 2000.

Oh - I forgot.

It's the Republicans who are divise and hate-filled.

Yeah.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), February 29, 2000.

Juniper, I think it's called "victimization". Liberals love this term. It causes "dependence". Another liberal buzz word. Therefore there must be "gov't programs" to redress the wounds. These programs garner "votes" to keep liberals in power. Sadly, It's effective.

"I AM A VICTIM!" "YOUR GREAT GREAT GREAT GREAT-GRANDFATHER DID MY GREAT GREAT GREAT GREAT-GRANDFATHER WRONG!" "YOU OWE ME, APOLOGIZE AND PAY-UP!"

Sounds kinda silly doesn't it?

Each day is a new beginning on the road to happiness and properity. Carpe diem!

-- Light upon the shore (freedom@common-sense.together), February 29, 2000.

The Declaration of Independence exclusionary, racist? Exactly which passages are exclusionary, and racist? This state senate pinhead is conducting an ad hominen attack on a dead man in an effort to discredit his ideas.

Why is the media so intent on discrediting Jefferson, especially via his personal life? I'll tell you why. Because his intelligence, foresight, and ideals, plus those of Adams, Washington, and Franklin (who have also been publicly attacked lately), form the basis of our Constitutional Republic. This is an ongoing media-sponsored, government-sanctioned attack on our form of government.

The (horribly flawed) line of reasoning is as follows: Jefferson helped write the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Jefferson was a plantation owner and therefore a "slave master". You've seen the story on television about Jefferson and his "racist" love affairs. Therefore, Jefferson's ideas are evil and wrong. Therefore any school reading of the Declaration of Independence is tantamount to child abuse. Therefore the Constitution is also evil and wrong. Therefore, all hail the non-existent rights and de facto enslavement (ironic, isn't it?) of the New World Order.

-- Nathan (nospamwh@tsoever.moc), February 29, 2000.

Allow me preface this by saying that I don't have a racist bone in my body, by ANYBODY's accounting. But as I read through these posts, I began to wonder what would happen if all the demands these people are insisting upon, all the changes, all the "laws", etc., were to come into being just as they desired, what would become of them? It's obvious by the way they treat the documents that made this country the beacon of freedom it has always been, that they haven't the FOGGIEST idea of what freedom consists of, or what it takes to maintain it. I wonder what would happen to them if they were allowed to govern themselves in just exactly the ways they demand, without any outside assistance or interference.

-- Liz (lizpavek@hotmail.com), February 29, 2000.

The very first time Thomas Jefferson spoke the words "All men are created equal", he was in court.

He was the lawyer for a mulatto [sic] who was attempting to obtain his freedom. At the time, your race was determined through your mother's ancestry.

He tried to get that man's freedom, and he did it without payment.

When he drafted his version of the Virginia Constitution, it included emancipation for the slaves. His original (controversial) draft of the Declaration of Independence denounced slavery, and the slave trade.

Yes, he was a slave owner. Was he inconsistent? Not at all. He fought all his life to stop slavery. It should be noted he was the ONLY "Southerner" of the Revolutionary period who was against slavery. He fought constantly against his fellow Virginians on the subject.

So why did he own slaves?

Well, first of all, he had other responsibilities. He had what is called a "fiduciary responsibility" to the assets under his management. He inherited his father's estate (and slaves), and had to take care of his mother, siblings, cousins, and second cousins. The code of the time demanded that as the eldest son, he was required to take care of them all.

The holdings included slaves. Slaves were very valuable property. He couldn't discharge them, or reduce the value of his holdings without jeopardizing the whole of his responsibilities. Had he done so, he could have been thrown in prison!

Thomas Jefferson is more of friend and intellectual heir to emancipation than any other president - including Lincoln. Lincoln is given the credit for the Emancipation Proclamation. But Lincoln didn't give a damn about the slaves. He had only one agenda - federalism - "keeping the Union together" - at all costs.

The British "freed" the slaves during the Revolutionary war. But ONLY if they fought against the colonists. Lincoln effectively did the same thing for the same reason.

It disgusting and nauseating how Jefferson is portrayed by that Senator from NJ. Not surprising, though. That Senator obviously was badly instructed in the nation's history.

But then again - maybe that Senator is just a rascist himself.

Oops, I forgot. Only white European males can be rascist.

Jolly reads history

-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), February 29, 2000.

Nathan,

I agree.

If you can't attack the message, (Constitution, Declaration of Independence), attack the messenger. (Jefferson, Franklin, Washington etc)

How Clintonesque!

"The are all dead white slave owners...."

So? Read what they wrote!

-- Light upon the shore (freedom@common-sense.together), February 29, 2000.

With the left firmly in control of virtually all mainstream media and educational input the last two (now early in a third) generations have been exposed to, what else would we expect?

-- JB (noway@jose.com), February 29, 2000.

In a fiery speech, Bryant thundered that the Declaration of Independence's claim of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was an affront to his slave ancestors. He pleaded with his colleagues not to divide New Jersey's classrooms by forcing students to relive slavery.

Bryant's ancestors were slaves because of direct force that made them slaves. Bryant himself it seems is a slave because he chooses to be one. There's no freeing him until he chooses to free himself.

Given what has gone down in New Jersey ever since they achieved a Republican majority in their legislature and a Republican governnor I can't say that this kind of thing surprises me. I don't see much difference between what passes for a Republican in New Jersey and what would pass for a liberal Democrat here in the South. I heard this morning that New Jersey's Governor Whitman is supposedly a strong contender for the Republican Vice-Presidental candidate. The story was on NPR's Morning Edition.

Are there any longer any sons of Patrick Henry surviving? If there are, are any of them in this forum?

.......Alan.

The Providence Cooperative - free preparedness & survivalism FAQ's

http://www.providenceco-op.com

-- A.T. Hagan (athagan@netscape.net), February 29, 2000.

As a woman, I do have a quarrel, but it is not with Jefferson. My quarrel is with an accident of history that is interpreted by certain male Constitutional sects as indicative of the inferior status of women and minorities.

You see, when the Constitution was written, women and minorities were not recognized as having been "endowed with their Creator with certain inalienable rights." Women were chattel and many minorities were slaves. Women had limited recognized common law and statutory rights under the law, but mostly, they were chattel. Slaves were also a type of property and had basically only those privileges allowed them by their master.

The 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments dealt with the recognition of women and blacks as having equal civil status with white males or freemen. Women and minorities see their rights as derived from the Creator and only latently properly recognized in civil rights.

Certain Constitutional sects allegedly bolstered by the scriptures, however, still see the rights of whit males as originating from the Creator, yet the rights of women and blacks are only "14th Amendment rights." e.g., the rights originate solely from a Constitutional Amendment and not from the Creator. They are inferior civil rights only, and not natural rights. To top it off, they cite certain irregularities in the adoption of these Amendments, leaving the status of women and blacks as questionable in their eyes.

Jefferson borrowed quite heavily from George Mason, (another slave owner, I believe,) who is attributed as doing a bit of authoring on the Virginia Declaration of Rights, June 12, 1776. It "starts like this":

I "That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

-- anon (anon@anon.calm), February 29, 2000.

It is so sad.

I am a woman and women have been enslaved much longer than blacks. Black women even longer. I think the Declaration of Independence is a great work, it gives hope to those that have not, and prehaps motivation. I think it should be a major subject in schools, but that would not sinc with TPTB.

I remember we used to say the Pledge of Allegence to The Flag every day when I went to school. One day it changed... it was no longer "under God". Still to this day I say "under God" in the pledge.

I hope he can find blessings for these poor selfish people. Well maybe not..but I hope he continues to give all the unselphis people hope.

Sandy

-- Sandy (rstyree@overland.net), February 29, 2000.

Well, I reread the Declaration of Independence. The only group that may be construed to have been "excluded" are the group called tyrants. The only "race" spoken of disparagingly are the tyrant race. Therefore, anyone denouncing the Declaration of Independence must be, by logical default, a tyrant, would-be tyrant, or tyrant's toady.

America is not its lands, buildings, or stock market. America is not its farms, cities, or the locus of corporate transnationalism. America isn't even its current inhabitants. America is an idea, and that idea is expressed in its founding documents and lawful amendments to those documents. The day our people are led to recoil in horror via negative associations with those documents, the day our so-called leaders stand up and publicly disparage those documents -- the very idea of America -- and turn the meaning of those documents on its head, is the day America, the idea of America, is finished. If not already directly upon us, that day draws near.

-- Nathan (nospamwh@tsoever.moc), February 29, 2000.

I'm sorry (not really) but the social and economic circumstances of the time make the statement, without caveats, a bold and revolutionary leap forward in the recognition of all people.

I am saddened and disheartened by all those who feel or think (think is a poor word to use for this), that equality of opportunity is the same as equality of result. Opportunity isn't a level playing field, it's a chance to try regardless and/or against all odds. Jesse Owens went to Germany and shamed the master race philosophy, by opportunity, not result. Affimative action (in my opinion) denies the accomplishments of all those who competed and won in an equal competition. Whenever race, creed or color is a factor, we will never know if the best truly won. That strikes me as something none of us can, or ever will be, proud of.

-- JCC (wolverine_in_nc@hotmail.com), February 29, 2000.

It's time for all of us to calm down and take a look at WHO is manipulating us and for WHY. And then, we simply say "Stop: this is enough". If people-anyone, anywhere-don't like our Consititution, don't respect the spirit of freedom that engendered our society, they can speak-this is what the whole thing was all about. But no-one has the right to abrogate the foundations of this country.

There is a form of warfare called social terrorism. For the forum members, a cursory perusal of postings may establish that a pattern of action is occurring that is impacting the constitutional freedoms on which the US is based. Social terrorism is a relatively sophisticated concept, and effective because the society targeted does not recognize it for what it is when it occurs. This is happening to us. With each silencing, we lose ground. So let ALL of us speak, and speak as we wish. The time for games is over.

-- another government hack (keepwatching_2000@yahoo.com), February 29, 2000.

I pledge allegence, to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands; one nation , under GOD, Indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for All.

That is what they should learn in school, and then we would not have tyrants ruling our country.

Sandy

-- Sandy (rstyree@overland.net), February 29, 2000.

Geez. That prophecy club is batting 450. Hmmm. Concerning...

-- Hokie (Hokie_@hotmail.com), March 01, 2000.

O.K Hack,

No game , I am free whatcha going to do ,chem trail me manana?

-- Sandy (rstyree@overland.net), March 01, 2000.

All right, that does it. I say we get like-minded people together, pool our money and buy an island somewhere (I prefer warm climates,since I'm not getting any younger...) and run own damn country. Are you with me or against me?

-- Daisy Jane (deeekstrand@access1.com), March 01, 2000.

Sandy,

I asked my boys (7 and almost 10) today if they still say the pledge in school (we're in NJ) and they said "every day". I asked had they ever talked about what it means in class? Nope.

But I've talked to them about it. And I've also read *with* them The Declaration of Independance, the Bill of Rights and part of the Constitution. It's important for them to know that this government belongs to all of us and we should be proud of it despite it's warts. And I don't want them to just 'know' it belongs to us. I want them to have a sense of proud ownership about it because when you're proud of something you own, you tend to take very good care of it...

-TECH32-

-- TECH32 (TECH32@NOMAIL.CON), March 01, 2000.

"When you're proud of something you own, you tend to take very good care of it."

We'll need to take it BACK before we can take care of it. This will NEED to be done as a result of those of us who have failed to protect it in the first place. I now realize that I shall not live to see the day. Too many stoned, drunken, spineless, dependent, godless and ignorant 'taxpayers' in this country. Our government is totally out of control and our citizens are too stupid to know it. 95% of the voters in this country continue to reject the Constitution-based platform of Alan Keyes in favor of big government mush. Mush they shall have and mutton they shall become. I shall wear my rubber boots to the voting booth in order to wade through the mounds of Sheeple shit that will be present. I'm considering carrying an electric cattle prod and a copy of the Constitution pinned to my chest.

-go ahead, make my day-

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), March 01, 2000.