[MiNe 109]

In article
,
Clyde Slick wrote:

On 16 Sep, 21:30, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Sep 16, 7:36*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:





Shhhh! said:

³ I swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true
allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs and successors
and that I will as in duty bound honestly and faithfully defend Her
Majesty, her heirs and successors in person, crown and dignity against
all enemies and will observe and obey all orders of Her Majesty, her
heirs and successors and of the generals and officers set over me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of...#Military_Oath

Can you understand why our founding fathers might not have wanted to
have our military do the same? ;-)

The loyalty oath dates back to the 1770s? We were barely even a country
then.

"The Continental Army was created on June 14, 1775 by the Continental
Congress as a unified army for the states to fight Great Britain, with
George Washington appointed as its commander.
[...]
After the war, though, the Continental Army was quickly disbanded as part
of the Americans' distrust of standing armies, and irregular state
militias became the new nation's sole ground army, with the exception of
one battery of artillery guarding West Point's arsenal. However, because
of continuing conflict with Native Americans, it was soon realized that it
was necessary to field a trained standing army. The first of these, the
Legion of the United States, was established in 1791."

That's also from wikipedia.

As is this:

One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that
the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey
orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of
Military Justice to obey lawful orders, officers in the service of the
United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that
violates the Constitution of the United States.

and

Note also that this is not an oath to defend any specific territory or
persons or property. This is an oath to defend the Constitution of the
United States.


I agree with you on that. I never said it was to defend any particular
territory


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...rvices_Oath_of...

I wonder how long Clyde will continue his ridiculous argument. LoL.-

Yeah, the Government is the embodiment of our Constitution.
The whole damn purpose of the Constitution is to
empower and legitimize our government.
So, when you swear allegiance to the Constitution,
your are swearkng allegiance to the
government. That is the whole point of'the Constitution,
to make our government.
You cannot swear allegiance to the Constitution
without swearing allegiance to the government.
the Constitution is absolutely meaningless without our
government. If you ahve no allegiance to the government,
you just can't have any allegiance to the Constitution.
UNLESS you want to argue that the government we have
is not the same government as prescribed by the Constitution.
Do you want to go there?

Since the government can act un-Constitutionally, your argument fails.

Stephen