NATURAL LAW AND THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

NATURAL LAW AND THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LET ME ANSWER (again) a question that some have asked me regarding the Electoral College.

Briefly:
The Electoral College was created out of the philosophy studied by the Founding Fathers and their strong belief in the Natural Law.

The Natural Law is the law of morality and ethics. Its most fundamental expression of principle is that "All men ought to act according to their true conscience." This is the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas in his work, Summa Theologica and earlier expressed by Plato in his works on "Metaphysics." The term Meta means "beyond." The term Physics means "the physical world."

Metaphysics is the study beyond the physical world that we live in.

The Founding Fathers believed that an essential function of a democracy is to express the will of an "informed" majority in the interest of the Public Good.

The Founding Fathers foresaw that their might arise a situation where the will of the majority contravenes the public good or may be an expression of an act against Ethics.

An example might be where the majority (plurality) of voters have voted to abolish their democracy and vote in a tyrannical government.

To address that potential dysfunction of a democracy, the Founding Fathers created an Electoral College that casts the votes to elect the President and Vice President.

Members of the Electoral College are equal in number to each state's members of the House of Representatives and their two Senators.

It is tradition for them to cast their votes for the winner of the plurality of votes in their states.

HOWEVER, as instilled by the Founding Fathers, these members of the Electoral College are NOT mandated to cast their votes for the majority winner of their state.  Some states have enacted party rules or state statutes which attempt to mandate loyal voting or disqualify disloyal voting.  These statutes or rules are of no consequence when contemplating the historical backdrop to the formation of the Electoral College and their ethical duty to act according to true conscience. 

The members of the Electoral College are dictated by their conscience to cast their votes on behalf of their state's constituency.

IF A MEMBER of the Electoral College's true conscience does not allow them to cast their vote for the majority winner of their state, then they OUGHT to act only according to their true conscience and cast their vote accordingly.

THEREFORE, a member of the Electoral College is NOT obligated to cast their votes, except according to their true conscience.

Theoretically, the members of the Electoral College may cast their votes for Hillary Clinton or even for a third party candidate, without regard to the majority vote winner in their state.

Whether these electoral college members will cast their votes for a candidate other than their state's winning candidate is extremely unlikely. The members will vote for their state's winner, unless a catastrophic event occurs which allows them to be guided by their conscience when casting their votes.

There is no chance of the electoral college viewing the election of Donald Trump as a conscience shaking event. There is no chance that Hillary Clinton will be given the electoral votes from the states where she lost the plurality of the votes.

The Natural Law, which supercedes any conventional laws made by man, does not apply to or favor Hillary Clinton when the Electoral College casts their votes.
(c)oliver2016
-----------------------------
UPDATED: See comment below in answer to point raised on Trump's "fitness to serve."

*** [ An unfit person, is only one potential event, which can lead the EC to elect a candidate, other than the plurality winner of their state.

As I explained above, the EC is based on Natural Law principles studied by Thomas Jefferson and others. (Because we were only permitted to study primary sources, I was required to read the same original, rare text book on Natural and Politic Law, by J.J. Burlamaqui, that Jefferson studied from, in addition to studying the Letters of Thomas Jefferson.)

Any time a member of EC votes, they are duty-bound to vote their true conscience. The reality is that the EC will cast their votes for the plurality winner of their state. There is nothing in this past election that would change the minds of enough EC college members to vote otherwise. ...

BUT, a person  raised a valid point.
The  issue of whether Trump is the type of candidate that should not receive the EC vote, is problematic.

In Ethics, Trump could be deemed to be unfit to serve as president. The statement of Pope Francis that Trump "lacks the moral qualifications to lead a country," raises an ethical dilemma for the EC. Although Ethics does not arise from religious principles, the Pope clearly is an authority on ethics and morality.

In Ethics, the Pope's assessment of Trump is conclusive in recognizing that ethics dictates that  in order to act morally, "one ought not to vote for Trump." This moral dictate applies to the members of the electoral college.

Therefore, it is correct, that in Ethics, members of the EC "ought" not to vote for Trump, in order to act morally.]
(c)oliver2016
-----------------:
Note: For further study, SEE: Fagothy, Austin. "Right & Reason."
Austin Fagothy was a modern day, world-renowned philosopher who taught at the University of Santa Clara. Prof. Fagothy's text is highly recommended. It is a concise statement of argument of the pros and cons on major ethical issues, written with incomparable clarity

ISRAEL ULTRA CONSERVATIVE GOVERNMENT ELATED OVER TRUMP ELECTION ANNOUNCES END OF PALESTINE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN ISRAEL, NETANYAHU congratulated newly elected president Donald Trump, stating that Israel has a "shared destiny" with America. President-elect Donald Trump invited Netanyahu to meet with him as soon as the Israeli Prime Minister can arrange his travels.

In the face of criticism for earlier statements by Netanyahu which were interpreted by world leaders to be a willful disregard of international law and UN resolutions, Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu had refrained from making further controversial statements in his congratulatory statements on the election of President-elect Donald Trump.

Netanyahu's restraint however, was not reflected by the rest of his ultra conservative cabinet members. Netanyahu's ultra conservative members shouted to Israel's press, that Trump's election marks "the end of the two State solution" and is "an end to the existence of Palestine."

Netanyahu's ultra conservative appointments called for an "immediate move of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem" in a symbolic message that Israel has annexed Jerusalem from Palestine.
Currently, no country in the world has located their Embassy in Jerusalem. No country currently recognizes Israel's claim of Jerusalem as its capital, based on the recognized legal status of East Jerusalem under international law.

The United States consistently, from Republican through Democratic Presidents, has refused to locate the US Embassy to Jerusalem. Netanyahu among other top cabinet officials have called for the US Embassy to be moved quickly to Jerusalem.

It was earlier reported, that Donald Trump earlier made a personal promise to Netanyahu to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem.
Trump's promise goes against long-standing policy of the US and against UN resolutions and world-wide recognized international law.

The Israeli Occupation of East (Old) Jerusalem is construed by the United Nations as a violation of international law and in violation of long standing UN Resolutions. These include the same resolutions which had created the state of Israel.

Under the "1947 UN Partition Plan for Palestine," the United Nations partitioned off 78% of Palestine and gave those defined boundaries to the Zionist Party for creation of a separate Jewish state in Palestine.

Under the terms of the 1947 UN Partition Plan, Israel was given West (new) Jerusalem, while East Jerusalem remained within the original country of Palestine. Israel militarily occupied East Jerusalem during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War.

The UN has reaffirmed Israel's illegal occupation of East Jerusalem through UN Resolution 242 and subsequent resolutions which call for Israel's withdrawal to boundaries defined prior to the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. International law experts note that no country is permitted to acquire lands through annexation of another country or region.

The UN Charter, the Law of War on Land (1907), numerous UN Resolutions and post Napoleonic Custom and Protocol under International Law, prohibits any country from "Acquisition by Annexation" of lands.

Many newspaper references to the status of Jerusalem inaccurately portray the issue of Israel Occupation of Jerusalem as a competition by both Palestinians and Israelis for East Jerusalem to be their capital.

Despite that portrayal, according to the United Nations and world community, the current legal status of East Jerusalem is that it was never a portion of the lands partitioned by the UN and given to Israel.
UN spokespersons, including the UN Secretary General have noted that East Jerusalem historically remains within the original country of Palestine under the UN Partition Plan and under International Law.

President-elect Trump is poised to disregard the world community and international law by acting on reported favors requested by Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu, relating to the US Embassy and Occupation of East Jerusalem and eliminating the State of Palestine.

On the election of Trump, President Abbas of Palestine congratulated President-elect Donald Trump and promised to work towards peace in accordance with UN Resolutions and under International Law governing the status of East Jerusalem.
(c)oliver2016
-------------
RAY OLIVER

WHY ARE THERE PROTESTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY AGAINST DONALD TRUMP?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because, Trump told America that women and girls are worthless and free to physically, sexually abuse when you "are a star."

And a large portion of the United States electorate agreed

Because, Trump told America and disabled people that children and adults with Cerebral Palsy act funny, "like this, (parodies acts)."
And a large portion of the United States electorate agreed.

Because, Trump displayed his pretentiously named son, Baron, in front of America and told a mother that her infant son, will never achieve higher success or professional esteem than being a "future construction worker."
And a large portion of the United States electorate agreed.

Because, Trump told America that it is "okay to target specific religious groups," despite the principles of the Founding Fathers guaranteeing a Freedom of Religion in America.
And a large portion of the United States electorate agreed.

But, a larger portion of America, representing a majority of the electorate have disagreed.

-----------

Ray Oliver 

Nov. 12, 2016

THE DONALD & EL CHAPO: THE REACH

THE DONALD & EL CHAPO:  The Reach

PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFUL DONALD Trump has been campaigning throughout the country and politicking on a platform of higher and stronger walls and bigger and stronger prosecution for all border-crossing Mexicano families

These are the families who have calculated that the prospect of achieving American Liberty and Property, far outweighs the risk of being caught and prosecuted for their illegal entry into the United States.   

The Donald being a Wharton School MBA graduate, recognizes the economic nuances of Mexicano marketplace competition.  He has blasted this Meh-i-cano assessment of American compassion, opportunity and easy access.

Also entering this Presidential insanity trail is the notorious El Chapo.

El Chapo is a duly self-made President himself, of sorts.

El Chapo as the world well knows, is the number one drug cartel kingpin in all of Cartel Meh-i-co.   

As the international wire services have verified, El Chapo “don’t need no stinkin prison walls” to keep him from pursuing his special vision of Liberty and Property. 

Having gotten the news of The Donald’s trivializing the worth of Mexicanos, compared to

the value of a higher border wall, El Chapo being a newly escaped prisoner from MAXIMUM security, boldly tweeted The Donald with a threat couched in fluent American profanity. 

Presidential hopeful Donald Trump is unfazed by El Chapo’s threat.

I am relatively certain that The Donald does not know the story of “the reach,” which has gone down into the annals of Mafia influence and distorted notions of loyalty.

This true story characterizes a top ranking Mafioso who left behind a stunningly attractive wife, when the jail doors clanged behind him.  

His spoken word quickly circulated, “to take care of his wife and family.” 
Loyalty and fear did just that.  His wife and family were well cared for.

But, the unspoken word was “you don’t fool with his woman.”

This ruthless El Chapo-like Capo soon died in prison. 

Being dead, buried and gone, one of the Don Juan mobsters began to openly date and sleep with the dead Capo’s widowed wife. 

And this “Joie de vivre,”  lover of life Don Juan was quickly found dead from an unfortunate collision with bullets. His name was scratched off the hit list.

In the annals of Mobster power it is said that “The hit was ordered from the grave.”   

And it is not a stretch to put El Chapo and that Capo who held graveside court, in the same incredibly dangerous category of killers. 

Tweeting ruthless fear is one thing. 

But interjecting himself into the U.S. presidential insanity trail

is a whole different level of El Chapo reach.