Relation+to+the+U.S.+Constitution

= =

Property Rights
“For a man to take anything wrongfully from another, and to increase his own means of comfort by his fellow-man’s discomfort, is more contrary to nature than death, than poverty, than pain, than anything else that can happen to one’s body or his external condition (Cicero, Ch. 5).” Cicero believed that if a person robed someone or took away their property then that is far worse than dying because “…if each of us seizes for himself the goods of others, and takes what he can from every one for his own emolument, the society and intercourse of men must necessarily be subverted (Cicero, Ch. 5).” This relates to the U.S Constitution because people have their own property rights and no one can steal that from them. The Constitution protects property rights mainly through the Fifth Amendment’s Taking or Just Compensation Clause: “nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”  · Thomas Jefferson: “Lives, Liberties, and Estates (property).”  · James Madison: “…as men is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.”  · John Adams: “Property is surely a right of mankind, as really a liberty.”



= = =Slavery=

Cicero claimed that what is expedient is morally right; however, “there often occur cases of such a nature that expediency seems in conflict with the right (Cicero, Ch.12)." Whether slavery was to be allowed or prohibited under the Constitution was a matter of conflict between North and South, with Southern states refusing to unite if slavery was not permitted. To unite the separarted colonies the Constitution writers made a three-fifth compromise in which the slaves were considered "three fifths of all other Persons (Article 1, Section 2)." The Founding Fathers wanted to unite more than argue about slavery, therefore they did what was expedient and permitted slavery, even though it was not morally right.  · Permitting slavery was an expedient decision that was not morally right.

Do you think that the Founding Fathers’ decision was expedient? Why?



=**Oath of Office for President**=

Section 1 of Article 2 states that “before he (the President) enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:-- 'I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.'” The President has to take the Oath of Office to affirm that he will faithfully execute his duty and will defend the Constitution of the Unites States of America. This relates to Cicero’s idea that a person in government needs to take an oath to “…bear in mind that he has God for a witness (Cicero, Ch. 10)” and that he should carry out his moral duties faithfully.

What is the purpose of the President taking an oath? Is it just a formality or has some practical use?