An open question...

The Constitution is essentially the rule of law for our nation. It is designed and intended to be applied to citizens of our country, just as other countries have their own rules of law. India's rule of law doesn't apply to American citizens anymore than our rule of law applies to them. We can't go to Syria and arrest Makmud for beating his wife, because our jurisdiction and rule of law does not extend to Syria. So what happens in Syria, stays in Syria, and we have nothing to do with what might be injustices here, it's not our country.

You are continuing to wrong-headedly apply our rule of law to foreigners, and bestow the rights you wish to bestow, based on nothing more than knee-jerk emotionalism. You are totally opposed to allowing a foreign corporation or entity to have a political voice or help shape US policy, those "freedoms" are denied, but you wish to apply other freedoms, like trial by jury of piers, etc. So you are picking and choosing which freedoms the foreigner is and isn't entitled to. How can you possibly give someone a "fair" trial if you have denied them freedom of speech? It gets all convoluted, because we don't know which rights you want to give to foreigners and which rights you wish to deny!

The Constitution should apply or it shouldn't. Make up your mind! One way or the other! Either the Constitution applies to foreigners and they have every right articulated in it, or they don't... it's as simple as that!
 
Jarod said:
Based on what do you alienate him from his right to a jury trial, or his 5th Amendment rights?
Click to expand...

No one is saying the bullshit you throw around...

A military tribunal has a jury and no one can be forced to testify...

so stop mis-quoting, mis-representing, and mis-characterizing what others post....
 
Jarod said:
Sure you are calling him an enemy combatant, AKA warrior. He is not worthy of that label, he is a cowardly pittafull criminal.
Click to expand...

We can call them whatever the hell we want...whether you like or not is irrelevant...
 
the constitution is not a declaration of rights for american citizens, or people abroad. It is a document that does nothing more than prescribe a handful of powers to a central government and then follows it up with a list of restrictions on that central government. That means that ANY person, be it American, Canadian, or Saudi Arabian, has certain legal and inalienable rights and the US Government has no more power over a mexican national than they do Mr. and Mrs. Jones from Illinois.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
the constitution is not a declaration of rights for american citizens, or people abroad. It is a document that does nothing more than prescribe a handful of powers to a central government and then follows it up with a list of restrictions on that central government. That means that ANY person, be it American, Canadian, or Saudi Arabian, has certain legal and inalienable rights and the US Government has no more power over a mexican national than they do Mr. and Mrs. Jones from Illinois.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true bonehead....

I don't think even jarod would buy the above crap....
 
Dixie said:
The Constitution is essentially the rule of law for our nation. It is designed and intended to be applied to citizens of our country, just as other countries have their own rules of law. India's rule of law doesn't apply to American citizens anymore than our rule of law applies to them. We can't go to Syria and arrest Makmud for beating his wife, because our jurisdiction and rule of law does not extend to Syria. So what happens in Syria, stays in Syria, and we have nothing to do with what might be injustices here, it's not our country.

You are continuing to wrong-headedly apply our rule of law to foreigners, and bestow the rights you wish to bestow, based on nothing more than knee-jerk emotionalism. You are totally opposed to allowing a foreign corporation or entity to have a political voice or help shape US policy, those "freedoms" are denied, but you wish to apply other freedoms, like trial by jury of piers, etc. So you are picking and choosing which freedoms the foreigner is and isn't entitled to. How can you possibly give someone a "fair" trial if you have denied them freedom of speech? It gets all convoluted, because we don't know which rights you want to give to foreigners and which rights you wish to deny!

The Constitution should apply or it shouldn't. Make up your mind! One way or the other! Either the Constitution applies to foreigners and they have every right articulated in it, or they don't... it's as simple as that!
Click to expand...
are you suggesting that foreign nationals within our borders do not fall under our constitution?
 
maineman said:
are you suggesting that foreign nationals within our borders do not fall under our constitution?
Click to expand...

I am suggesting you all need to make up your minds whether Constitutional rights apply to foreign citizens or not. We had a rather lengthy debate following the recent SCOTUS decision, about whether "foreign-owned corporations" should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns, pursuant to what the SCOTUS ruled was a corporation's constitutional right under the 1st Amendment.

You simply can't slice and dice the Constitution up and apply only the rights you want someone to have while denying other rights you may not want them to have. Either the Constitutional rights apply or they don't, to any person standing on US soil, regardless of whether they are an illegal alien, enemy combatant, terrorist, or foreign owner of a corporation. I know what I think... that the Constitution doesn't apply to non-citizens of the United States, and someone who is not a citizen is not entitled to the same rights as citizens. This means that foreign corporation owners don't get to contribute to political campaigns, but also, that terrorists don't get a trial in a US Federal Court! One rule, consistently applied to all cases, no deviation. What you are wanting is to parse the Constitution and divvy up the rights you want someone to have on a whim, when you feel like they should have them. Unfortunately, the Constitution can not work that way!
 
Dixie said:
I am suggesting you all need to make up your minds whether Constitutional rights apply to foreign citizens or not. We had a rather lengthy debate following the recent SCOTUS decision, about whether "foreign-owned corporations" should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns, pursuant to what the SCOTUS ruled was a corporation's constitutional right under the 1st Amendment.

You simply can't slice and dice the Constitution up and apply only the rights you want someone to have while denying other rights you may not want them to have. Either the Constitutional rights apply or they don't, to any person standing on US soil, regardless of whether they are an illegal alien, enemy combatant, terrorist, or foreign owner of a corporation. I know what I think... that the Constitution doesn't apply to non-citizens of the United States, and someone who is not a citizen is not entitled to the same rights as citizens. This means that foreign corporation owners don't get to contribute to political campaigns, but also, that terrorists don't get a trial in a US Federal Court! One rule, consistently applied to all cases, no deviation. What you are wanting is to parse the Constitution and divvy up the rights you want someone to have on a whim, when you feel like they should have them. Unfortunately, the Constitution can not work that way!
Click to expand...

I asked you a simple question. Why not grow a set of balls and just answer it, your cowardly pussy?
 
maineman said:
I asked you a simple question. Why not grow a set of balls and just answer it, your cowardly pussy?
Click to expand...

I will point out that none of the Articles apply to a foreign national, since they are not citizens of any state, can't vote, and can't hold public office. As for the Amendments, none of the ones that relate to voting or holding office...

So it really comes down to what kinds of rights and protections we want to bestow upon our guests...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top