texas court makes new law out of thin air, negates a right of the people

[domer76]

it is confirmed that you have no clue what rights are.

Oh, the irony!

 

[domer76]

usurping a power they don't have.

Says who, “vehicles cannot be necessary”? You?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Oh, the irony!

the irony indeed, mrs 'no inalienable rights', dumbass

 

[domer76]

the irony indeed, mrs 'no inalienable rights', dumbass

Yeah, they are all absolute.

You’ve had your ass kicked by multiple people on your absurd and ignorant posts. Give it up, ignorant fuck. You only humiliate yourself.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Yeah, they are all absolute.

You’ve had your ass kicked by multiple people on your absurd and ignorant posts. Give it up, ignorant fuck. You only humiliate yourself.

believing what you want to, doesn't make you right. you're simply too brainwashed and geared for slavery to understand freedom. probably because you're a cuckboy coward

 

[domer76]

believing what you want to, doesn't make you right. you're simply too brainwashed and geared for slavery to understand freedom. probably because you're a cuckboy coward

Three people kicked your ass on your ignorant claims of “absolute” rights. You’re just too fucking stupid to realize it.

Please, tell the forum again why “vehicles cannot be necessary” in a modern society. Many could use a good laugh.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Three people kicked your ass on your ignorant claims of “absolute” rights. You’re just too fucking stupid to realize it.

did i hurt you that bad that you're seeing things now? because that didn't happen

Please, tell the forum again why “vehicles cannot be necessary” in a modern society. Many could use a good laugh.

do you have a right to drive these vehicles??????????? yes or no.

 

[domer76]

did i hurt you that bad that you're seeing things now? because that didn't happen



do you have a right to drive these vehicles??????????? yes or no.

Thanks for confirming your multiple ass kickings.

Where did I claim a right, stupid shit? I merely outed you on your idiotic claim that “vehicles cannot be necessary” in modern societies.

Tell us again, Einstooge. How does your supermarket get the food that you purchase? Horse and buggy?

Forum idiot.

 

[Lord Yurt]

Thanks for confirming your multiple ass kickings.

Where did I claim a right, stupid shit? I merely outed you on your idiotic claim that “vehicles cannot be necessary” in modern societies.

Tell us again, Einstooge. How does your supermarket get the food that you purchase? Horse and buggy?

Forum idiot.

Why do police need guns? What right under the Constitution gives them privilege to carry a gun?

 

[domer76]

Why do police need guns? What right under the Constitution gives them privilege to carry a gun?

Smoke another joint, doper. See if you can get LESS coherent, if that’s possible.

 

[Into the Night]

They didn't include those rights at all. The Bill of Rights was only added after the Constitution was ratified as a deal to get opponents to ratify it. They did not think any of those restrictions on federal power were necessary.

They are not restrictions on federal power. They clarify restrictions on federal power that were already there. Unless the federal government is specifically given a power, they do not have it!

What keeps you from being able to do any damn thing you please by publishing pictures of child pornography

State law. The federal government can do nothing.

or infringing on the rights of others?

State and federal law.

Criminal laws prevent you from doing that.

Fine. You are attempting a compositional error fallacy.

A criminal law making it illegal to publish child pornography is a regulation.

No, it's a law. It's a State law.

Therefore, you argue against your own case.

He is not making that case. Compositional error fallacy.

You say our rights (free press) cannot be regulated but then claim those rights can be restricted.

The federal government can pass no law concerning the press. The 1st amendment clarifies that. The States can pass any kind of law they want concerning the press IF their constitutions give them that authority.

When the 1st says "no law" shall abridge free press you are saying laws can abridge (infringe) the right of a person to publish child pornography.

The federal government cannot abridge the free press. The States can.

In your definition, that means free press is a privilege and not a right.

Compositional error fallacy. False dichotomy fallacy.

You are simply agreeing with the views of most Americans and posters who believe our rights are not absolute

Compositional error fallacy.

and can be restricted and those restrictions are based on court interpretation.

Compositional error fallacy. No court has the authority to interpret or change the Constitution.

 

[Lord Yurt]

Smoke another joint, doper. See if you can get LESS coherent, if that’s possible.

Not surprisingly you can't answer questions on a debate board... AGAIN

You're a lame troll, can't back up anything you claim and can't answer a single question. You're not here to debate, you're here solely to troll.

GFY

 

[domer76]

Not surprisingly you can't answer questions on a debate board... AGAIN

You're a lame troll, can't back up anything you claim and can't answer a single question. You're not here to debate, you're here solely to troll.

GFY

Fire up another doob, stoner. You’ll think you’re more intelligent, but the rest of us still recognize you as a fucking brain dead moron.

Go eat a fucking Butterfinger, doper.

 

[Into the Night]

If it was a right that could not be abridged then the laws would not exist because government would declare them unconstitutional--that is what a right means.

That is NOT what a right means.

Yes, you cannot harm others because criminal laws prevent it. Those are regulations of our rights.

You do not have the right to harm others except in certain narrow cases.

Assume the child pornography consists of pictures of nude children not engaged in any sexual activities taken by their parents.

Then they are not child pornography. They are not pornography at all.

Whose rights are being harmed if those pictures are published?

Depends on who publishes them and where.

What if it is computer generated child pornography

That is not pornography either.

not involving any real children--whose rights are being harmed.

Depends on who is publishing them.

You see examples of behavior which you do not approve of but refuse to admit that behavior can be regulated if it is one of our rights. Is "hate speech" harming others? It cannot be regulated.

Not by the federal government. States can though.

You are still attempting to make a compositional error fallacy. You are still making a redefinition fallacy (amendment<->right).

 

[Into the Night]

The SCOTUS interprets the Constitution, what did you think they have been doing for the last two hundred plus years

They do not have the authority to interpret the Constitution.

 

[Into the Night]

Yeah, they are all absolute.

Compositional error fallacy.

You’ve had your ass kicked by multiple people on your absurd and ignorant posts. Give it up, ignorant fuck. You only humiliate yourself.

YALIF.

 

[Micawber]

All laws are made out of thin air, nature boy

 

[Into the Night]

Three people kicked your ass on your ignorant claims of “absolute” rights. You’re just too fucking stupid to realize it.

Lie. YALIF.

Please, tell the forum again why “vehicles cannot be necessary” in a modern society. Many could use a good laugh.

Contexomy fallacy.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Thanks for confirming your multiple ass kickings.

Where did I claim a right, stupid shit? I merely outed you on your idiotic claim that “vehicles cannot be necessary” in modern societies.

Tell us again, Einstooge. How does your supermarket get the food that you purchase? Horse and buggy?

Forum idiot.

they PAY for the PRIVILEGE of owning and using modern vehicles..........THEY ARE NOT NECESSARY.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Why do police need guns? What right under the Constitution gives them privilege to carry a gun?

good luck getting the copsucking badge blower to answer that one