From a person in local Govt

[Hillcountry]

Hey! Anyone can cherry-pick whatever they want to. Some tend to value independence and freedom over excessive government.

Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by Hillcountry

Hey! Anyone can cherry-pick whatever they want to. Some tend to value independence and freedom over excessive government.

Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

Really? You chose to quote an Article that begins "Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men;..." as evidence to support claim that individual liberty was important above all else to the drafters of NH's Constitution?

Here's a question; which group of people is actually perverting "the ends of Government" where the stated the purpose of Government is "the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men"?

What would the drafters of the document have chosen to save? Lives or profit? That is what this comes down to; Does one man right to the happiness of profit and property outweigh another's right to the happiness of continued life and family.