No.  Again you are wrong in that you are now not only interpreting the law wrong, but you are purposefully reading what you want into the law and my words. 

No, again, by "love of state", I mean that you put a higher premium on the power of the state, even when and if that power trumps the Rights of the individual. 

I am very familiar with the quote from Washington and the whole concept of the Social Contract.  You really do not need to admonish me to study.  You entered this conversation with a condescending attitude like you've come down from an ivory tower to bestow upon me and others you unique wisdom, which is what has always rubbbed me wrong about you.  You are an unnecessarily hostile, caustic person in your posts here.  I may have started a thread, but you picked the fight.

When you do respond, you deflect and refuse to address the arguements directly.  You throw in red herrings and play magicians games with smoke and mirrors, but continually fail to rebutt my central arguements.  You play well to a jury of the casual reader by attacking with an air of intellectual superiority, but are sloppy and unclear in defending your position. 

I will not continue to play these word games when you waste my time with half truths and innuendo.  If you want to address matters of substance, then feel free to start doing so;  otherwise, I'm too busy today to play in your little sand box.