[Mayor West] My fiendish plan to seed the Democrat Party with Supervillains is working![/Mayor West]
So are sex and voting. Doesn’t mean is legal to combine the two.
I agree 100 percent. Once again, Those Who Know What Is Best For You have raised their ugly heads. Everyone remember the Slippery Slope argument against such bannings? Guess what. It’s here.
WRONG. The Constitution lays out the powers granted to the government. Unless specificially allowed in the text, the government has no ability to limit our behavior in any way. All our rights are existent whether they are enumerated or not. In practice, we given up our freedoms in so many cases that it seems the only rights we have are the ones given to us; but that ass backwards.
It is in our Declaration of Independence.
Note: The Constitution, which you ask about is not a list of what the people will be allowed to do. It is the opposite. It is a list of the things Government will be allowed to do. Saying some right is not in the Constitution is a false argument, used by fascists and would be tyrants. All rights are included by default. Anything not listed defaults to the states or the individual.
“I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” – James Madison
“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” - James Madison
“The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and never can be erased or obscured by mortal power.” - -Alexander Hamilton, 1775
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt (1759-1806)
Freedom is not something that anybody can be given. Freedom is something people take, and people are as free as they want to be. - James Baldwin
Be not intimidated… nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your liberties by any pretense of politeness, delicacy, or decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for hypocrisy, chicanery and cowardice. - John Adams
Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. - Louis D. Brandeis
It is amazing how many people seem to think that the government exists to turn their prejudices into laws. - Thomas Sowell
Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual) -Ayn Rand
No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.
-Judge Gideon J. Tucker
Here is what you apparently believe. You seem to have the false impression that nothing should be allowed unless Big Brother gives you permission. Welcome to the police state?
“We ought to turn this country over to the police for two or three years and everything would be all right.”
–Chief Justice Earl Warren
There is no right of suffrage under Article II -Antonin Scalia
“Most of the rights that you enjoy go way beyond what the Constitution requires.”
-Antonin Scalia.
Looks like you bought their bullshit, didn’t you. You better start thinking about it.
And? You go into court and challenge this on the basis that it violates your “right to pursue happiness.” Come back after you get laughed out.
:rolleyes:
If that were true, I’d be able to grow pot in my backyard for my own personal use. The sad fact of the matter is that unless your right is specifically enumerated somewhere in law, you don’t have that right. Not my ideal situation, but that’s the real world.
Suck my fat cock. You don’t know what I believe.
You keep your fuzzy headed, idealistic crap. I’ll work in the real world with a real, genuine idea of how to keep myself free of this sort of legislation. Realism is going to be a lot more effective than whining, “Ooooh, but they’re violating my right to pursue happiness…waaaaah.”
I move out of that stage of idiocy when I was in high school.
In other words, when it comes to the real world, I’m right.
Sometimes James Madison seems to have been wiser than Buddha. A few select quotes:
*
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.
It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.
We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.
*
You are then an idiot and are full of shit. The reason you can’t grow pot is because someone at one time wrote a law specifically saying you can’t. You keep your jackboot fascist bullshit to yourself. All hail the fucking state. Power to the government. I didn’t grow up in the same USA as you I guess. I didn’t take any fucking oaths in the Army to Uphold and defend the fucking constitution I guess. I guess I never read anything either, just like you. No, I guess I, Adams, Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, O’Connor, Kennedy, Ike, and everybody in the history of the fucking world got it wrong. I am so grateful that you corrected me. Go fuck yourself with a rusty chainsaw. Ignorant bastard.
No they don’t.
My complaint, honestly, is that there is no such thing as so-called “public property”. All property has an owner, because ownership determines the dispensation of rights. So-called public property is merely owned by magistrates and governors. The solution to all such dilemmas, as far as I’m concerned, is the recognition of rights as an attribute of property ownership.
It seems to me that you have confused rights with permissions. It’s like saying you don’t have a nose if someone has stuffed your nostrils full of peanuts.
Yes, they do. It is the case that:
- A contradiction proves everything.
and
- Everything proves a tautology.
Contradictions and tautologies are the only noncontingent nonmodal predicate logical formulas.
What of those quotes? I don’t disagree with Madison in the least. But the sad fact is that once you allow your right to be taken away, you don’t have it anymore. It doesn’t exist until you take action and get it back. You can say you have this or that right, but unless it is legally recognized, you don’t have it.
Exactly my point. And now I no longer have the right to do that. Thanks for helping my argument.
Wow, you’re dumb. Where did I say that the government should be worshiped and allowed to do what they want?
:rolleyes:
Apparently not.
You mean the guys who felt that rights needed to be specifically enumerated in the Constitution (Mason, Jefferson, Madison, etc.) so much they amended it so that it did?
Again, skippy, take me up on my challenge. Grow some marijuana in your backyard for your own personal use and when the cops come to arrest you claim your “right to pursue happiness” and see how far it gets you.
It’s both. Parts of the Constitution lay out the powers of the federal government. Other parts lay out some but not all of the rights of the people.
A man who attributes his rights to ancient scribbles and the whims of magistrates is a tyrant’s wet dream.
Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
I came here for an argument! You know, a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
Now if you want me to go on contradicting you, you’ll have to pay for another five minutes.
No. Some parts lay out specific rights that the government can’t legislate away. But those rights don’t arise from the text. They are only specifically protected by it. As much as I disagree with Lib about the viability of a truly Libertarian Government (if men were angels, you know) he is certainly right about the fact that rights are inherent is the ownership of your own person. If you think your rights are granted by the government, then you believe the government owns you. We’ve allowed our government to trample on the concept of Liberty for too long and it may not be possible to undo some of the damage. But, dammit, can’t we stand up at some point and say “no more”?
Yes, you do have a right to smoke in your private property. It’s not specifically mentioned in the Constitution; but neither does the Constitution give the government the right to stop you. I also don’t believe it has the right to stop me from growing pot; or distilling liquor or many other things that are currently illegal. We’ve acquiesced so long now people are starting to seriously consider idiotic stuff like that mentioned in the OP or the inanity of Hillary’s ranting about GTA.
Damn. I wish I’d thought of that. (Incidentally, if I believed men were angels, I’d advocate anarchy. ;))
:smack: Woods for the trees, and all that. 