History[ edit ] The concept of popular sovereignty from which the consent of the governed derives its importance did not originate in North America; its intellectual roots can be traced back to 17th- and 18th-century European political philosophy. Before the American Revolution, there were few examples of a people creating their own government.
Originally published as 62 Tenn. Permission for WWW use at this site generously granted by the author. For educational use only.
The printed edition remains canonical. For citational use please obtain a back issue from William S.
But what many casual readers may not realize is that those articles are simply the latest installments in what has become a rich and interesting literature. Although the Second Amendment was almost completely ignored by Sovereignty essay questions academic community for the first two centuries of its existence, the past several years have seen an explosion of scholarship.
The reasons for that explosion are beyond the scope of this Article; they may stem in part from the increased prominence of "gun control" debates in contemporary politics, or from the natural tendency of Sovereignty essay questions law scholars to look for as yet unmined subjects for study.
But for whatever reason, the past five years or so have undoubtedly seen more academic research concerning the Second Amendment than did the previous two hundred. In this Article, I will summarize and criticize that scholarship.
By doing so, I hope to serve two purposes. First, I hope to provide readers who are unfamiliar with the literature sufficient background to understand references to it in other articles on this issue, or simply to consider themselves "Second Amendment literate.
Although some aspects of Second Amendment theory have been developed with a thoroughness that would surprise those unfamiliar with the field, other aspects deserve additional study. I hope that readers of this Article will be inspired to join in the conversation.
Introduction Before addressing the body of Second Amendment scholarship, it is worth taking a moment to put it into the context of the popular debate over gun controls and the right to bear arms. Although it would be something of an oversimplification, it is probably fair to say that those who support p.
For example, it is common to find "right wing" opponents of sexual liberty taking the position that the Ninth Amendment,  often cited as the root of the right to privacy that is typically implicated in cases involving sexual freedom,  means nothing.
Robert Bork, for example, has described the Ninth Amendment as an "inkblot" whose meaning cannot be deciphered,  and has referred to the right of privacy as a "loose canon in the law. In the case of the Second Amendment, at least until a few years ago, there was no such caselaw or scholarship.
Today there is still very little caselaw, but there is now a great deal of scholarship. That may change, and if it does it will probably be a good thing. Perhaps surprisingly, what distinguishes the Second Amendment scholarship from that relating to other constitutional rights, such as privacy or free speech, is that there appears to be far more agreement on the general outlines of Second Amendment theory than exists in those other areas.
Indeed, there is sufficient consensus on many issues that one can properly speak of a "Standard Model" in Second Amendment theory, much as physicists and cosmologists speak of a "Standard Model" in terms of the creation and evolution of the Universe.
But the overall framework for analysis, the questions regarded as being clearly resolved, and those regarded as still open, are all generally agreed upon. This is certainly the case with regard to Second Amendment scholarship. Unfortunately, despite the existence of unusually broad areas of scholarly consensus, this literature has so far had less of a disciplinary effect on public debate than might otherwise be hoped.
Perhaps this Symposium, by increasing the awareness of general readers, will help to remedy that problem. I will discuss this subject at greater length below. Of course, a Standard Model among lawyers is not the same thing as a Standard Model among physicists.
For one thing, physicists can revise their theories based on new experiments and data. Lawyers lack such opportunities. The Supreme Court is the closest thing we have to a theory-testing device, but the Court does not really serve a theory-testing purpose.
First, as I have suggested elsewhere, prediction of Supreme Court decisions does little to validate particular theories, given the complexities involved.
Similarly, the Supreme Court's treatment of the First Amendment until well into this century was very similar to its treatment of the Second Amendment up to this point. At any rate, with these caveats I will discuss what can fairly be called the "Standard Model" of Second Amendment interpretation.
I will also discuss those aspects of Second Amendment theory that can be characterized as outside the Standard Model. I will then make some observations of my own regarding the shortcomings of both Standard Model and non-Standard Model theories, and will close with a few comments on the way in which the public debate over the Second Amendment has been influenced or not by the scholarly literature on the subject.Appendix 2: Selected Other Views on Calvinism and Free Will Norman Geisler Chosen But Free, second edition (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House, ) In this popular book, Norman Geisler propounds a view that he terms “moderate Calvinism,” in which he argues for both the sovereignty .
Popular sovereignty is a doctrine rooted in the belief that each citizen has sovereignty over themselves. Citizens may unite and offer to delegate a portion of their sovereign powers and duties to those who wish to serve as officers of the state, contingent on the officers agreeing to serve according to the will of the leslutinsduphoenix.com the United States, the term has been used to express this concept.
This essay delves deeply into the origins of the Vietnam War, critiques U.S. justifications for intervention, examines the brutal conduct of the war, and discusses the . Most Anglo-American readers know Bataille as a novelist.
The Accursed Share provides an excellent introduction to Bataille the philosopher. Here he uses his unique economic theory as the basis for an incisive inquiry into the very nature of civilization.
This forgery, Christ and the Disciples at Emmaus, was completed in To produce it, van Meegeren studied seventeenth-century pigment formulas, incorporated volatile flower oils in his pigments to create hardness, and used badger-hair brushes (a single modern bristle embedded in the paint would give him away) on canvas recycled from an unimportant seventeenth-century painting.
THE DIALOGUES OF LUCIUS ANNAEUS SENECA BOOK I TO LUCILIUS ON PROVIDENCE+. Why, though there is a Providence, some Misfortunes befall Good Men.