Today's lesson in the constitution

[domer76]

And your personal opinion is of zero import or consequence.

Locke's political philosophy is what the Constitution is built upon.



And I'm certainly not impressed with your scatterbrained, incoherent ramblings that have nothing to do with my statements.

Case in point:



WTF are you muttering about?

With the right, decisions that they don’t like are always “illegitimate”. Your long-winded version of the same crying and gnashing of teeth is no different.

Dred Scott?
Unelected, black-robed tyrants?

You don’t follow this forum much, do you?

Locke? Tell us about your Creator, Jethro.

[Abatis]

With the right, decisions that they don’t like are always “illegitimate”. Your long-winded version of the same crying and gnashing of teeth is no different.

You act as if the left doesn't whine and pout about cases it disagrees with. Citizens United anybody? I'm still trying to decipher what cases I've supposedly been haranguing about though. I've repeatedly said SCOTUS is and has been firmly on my side . . . The lower federal decisions that begat the "collective right" theories have been invalidated so besides stating that, where have I cried and gnashed teeth?

Dred Scott?
Unelected, black-robed tyrants?

Not my statements. Why have you brought them up multiple times now?

I must ask though, isn't Dred Scott universally accepted by all, left and right, as a despicable, horrible and yes, illegitimate decision?

You don’t follow this forum much, do you?

No. Even if I did I only reply to the words I quote or that are spoken to me; I don't go off and assign positions to the person I'm replying to, that others on the board stake out,. What's the value in that? It's obvious you find it impossible but try to just reply to that person . . .

Locke? Tell us about your Creator, Jethro.

My position is that the mention in the DoI about a "Creator" wasn't a theological statement, it was a political one establishing that rights are inherent. It doesn't matter where one believes rights originate from, just as long as you don't think government gives them to us.

It doesn't matter if you don't buy into that. It doesn't matter if your think it is the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard. I can guaranfuckentee whatever political ideology you latch on to wasn't around when the founders and framers were pouring over political treatises. Marx wasn't a founding father.

Whether you like it or believe in it, the government of the US is contractually bound to treat the rights of the citizen as inherent and not granted, given, created or established by government. It's like a pacifist being against violence and shunning weapons but being protected by citizens with weapons willing to do violence on their behalf.

It really just comes down to who gives a fuck what leftist contrarians and naysayers think?

[domer76]

You act as if the left doesn't whine and pout about cases it disagrees with. Citizens United anybody? I'm still trying to decipher what cases I've supposedly been haranguing about though. I've repeatedly said SCOTUS is and has been firmly on my side . . . The lower federal decisions that begat the "collective right" theories have been invalidated so besides stating that, where have I cried and gnashed teeth?



Not my statements. Why have you brought them up multiple times now?

I must ask though, isn't Dred Scott universally accepted by all, left and right, as a despicable, horrible and yes, illegitimate decision?



No. Even if I did I only reply to the words I quote or that are spoken to me; I don't go off and assign positions to the person I'm replying to, that others on the board stake out,. What's the value in that? It's obvious you find it impossible but try to just reply to that person . . .



My position is that the mention in the DoI about a "Creator" wasn't a theological statement, it was a political one establishing that rights are inherent. It doesn't matter where one believes rights originate from, just as long as you don't think government gives them to us.

It doesn't matter if you don't buy into that. It doesn't matter if your think it is the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard. I can guaranfuckentee whatever political ideology you latch on to wasn't around when the founders and framers were pouring over political treatises. Marx wasn't a founding father.

Whether you like it or believe in it, the government of the US is contractually bound to treat the rights of the citizen as inherent and not granted, given, created or established by government. It's like a pacifist being against violence and shunning weapons but being protected by citizens with weapons willing to do violence on their behalf.

It really just comes down to who gives a fuck what leftist contrarians and naysayers think?

Walk into a courtroom after you have "exercised" a non-codified right and see if you can defend that inherent bullshit. See how far that gets you.

[SmarterthanYou]

Walk into a courtroom after you have "exercised" a non-codified right and see if you can defend that inherent bullshit. See how far that gets you.

says the statist fuckstick who worships government after surrendering freedom. the founders would have shot, hung, or exiled your dumbass back to england.

[evince]

If there can be no infringements on the 2nd Amendment does that also mean 1st Amendment rights are absolute? "No law" seems as strong as "not be infringed."

To be clear, does the no infringement of the 2nd include prohibitions against felons owning weapons?

were slaves allowed to own guns?

[evince]

says the statist fuckstick who worships government after surrendering freedom. the founders would have shot, hung, or exiled your dumbass back to england.

this is proof you know nothing about American culture for real

fuck off russian bot

[domer76]

says the statist fuckstick who worships government after surrendering freedom. the founders would have shot, hung, or exiled your dumbass back to england.

Been to that courthouse with your popgun, pussified idiot?

Cretinous Coward

[SmarterthanYou]

this is proof you know nothing about American culture for real

fuck off russian bot

proof positive that you're a police state loving retard.

[SmarterthanYou]

Been to that courthouse with your popgun, pussified idiot?

Cretinous Coward

other peoples freedom terrifies the fuck out of you, doesn't it pussy?

[CFM]

were slaves allowed to own guns?

Do rights extend to property?

[SmarterthanYou]

were slaves allowed to own guns?

you tell us. democrats were the biggest slave owners in the day.

[evince]

lables not ideas

you sound more and more like a russian

[domer76]

other peoples freedom terrifies the fuck out of you, doesn't it pussy?

A simple “no” would have sufficed, coward.

Pussified moron. All hat, no cowboy.

Fucking idiot.

[domer76]

you tell us. democrats were the biggest slave owners in the day.

Ah, the ramblings of an historical dimwith. Those Democrats were conservatives.

You’re a conservative, aren’t you, shitweasel?

[CFM]

A simple “no” would have sufficed, coward.

Pussified moron. All hat, no cowboy.

Fucking idiot.

Yet you've been challenged to come to a location where you've indicated you know by having posted pictures of where you say I live and haven't shown.

Fucking coward. All mouth, nothing but nigger.