The US Constitution

Specifics — Race, In The 1700s And 1800s

Kevin A. Sensenig | October 14, 2012

There is a theory I have about the Amendment 1.  This is about a Constitution implied (virtually explicit) way out of slavery.  That is, referencing the Framers’ Constitution.  Again, I consider here the Preamble, Articles 1, 2, and 3, and Amendments 1 thru 10 as the Framers’ Constitution.

If the individual in front of you can speak a language, given the opportunity, or has attained a working premise or philosophy or understanding and knowledge, or has a grasp of religious depth, then that person is an individual to whom all of the rights within the Constitution apply.  It’s that simple.

There is another feature here that I will not spell out.

But I will spell out this.

“I wake up in the morning.  I go to the field.  I return at the evening.  I eat.”  Then that person is an individual to whom the Constitution applies.

A separate question is, What language?  What premise or philosophy or understanding and knowledge?  Then, what did his or her parents or elders or teachers or peers _teach_, or pass along?  Note here that the stance of the individual is the object.  (And the subject is material.)  Zen — “Nondualism states that phenomena (or things) are inseparable, but not that they are the same.”

(Zen — What are the objects of your own mind?)

Note that the American Indians had language, tribe, and (in places) distributed government.  This didn’t seem to make a difference, either.