1 files changed, 67 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/exampleSite/content/posts/no-treason.md b/exampleSite/content/posts/no-treason.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d8f9bc3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/exampleSite/content/posts/no-treason.md
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+{ 
+    "title": "No Treason - The Constitution of No Authority", 
+    "authors": ["Lysander Spooner"], 
+    "publishdate": "1869-01-19",
+    "tags": ["Law"]
+}
+
+The Constitution has no inherent authority or obligation. It has no
+authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and
+man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between
+persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract
+between persons living eighty years ago . 1 And it can be supposed to
+have been a contract then only between persons who had already come to
+years of discretion, so as to be competent to make reasonable and
+obligatory contracts. Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a
+small portion even of the people then exist¬ ing were consulted on the
+subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or
+ndissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give
+their consent formally, are all dead now. Most of them have been dead
+forty, fifty, sixty, or seventy years. And the Constitution, so far as
+it t oas their contract, died with them.  They had no natural power or
+right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only
+plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind
+their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is
+to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any
+body but “the people” then existing; nor does it, either expressly or
+impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to
+bind anybody but themselves. Let us see. Its language is:
+
+We, the people of the United States (that is, the people then existing
+in the United States), in order to form a more perfect union, insure
+domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the
+general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves ana
+our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitu¬ tion for the
+United States of America.
+
+It is plain, in the first place, that this language, as an agreement,
+purports to be only what it at most really was, viz., a contract
+between the people then existing; and, of necessity, binding, as a
+contract, only upon those then existing. In the second place, the
+language neither expresses nor implies that they had any intention or
+desire, nor that they imagined they had any right or power, to bind
+their “posterity” to five under it. It does not say that their
+“posterity” will, shall, or must live under it. It only says, in
+effect, that their hopes and motives in adopting it were that it might
+prove useful to their posterity, as well as to themselves, by
+promoting their imion, safety, tranquility, liberty, etc.
+
+Suppose an agreement were entered into, in this form:
+
+We, the people of Boston, agree to maintain a fort on Governor’s
+Island, to protect ourselves and our posterity against invasion.
+
+This agreement, as an agreement, would clearly bind nobody but the
+people then existing. Secondly, it would assert no right, power, or
+disposition, on their part, to compel^their “posterity” to maintain
+such a fort. It would only indicate that the supposed wel¬ fare of
+their posterity was one of the motives that induced the original
+parties to enter into the agreement.
+
+When a man says he is building a house for himself and his posterity,
+he does not mean to be understood as saying that he has any thought of
+binding them, nor is it to be inferred that he is so foolish as to
+imagine that he has any right or power to bind them, to live in it. So
+far as they are concerned, he only means to be understood as saying
+that his hopes and motives, in building it, are that they, or at least
+some of them, may find it for their happiness to live in it.