imported post
sv_libertarian wrote:
What you really mean to say is that you expect everyone to think exactly how you do, or you conveniently declare them to have no valid opinion, and thus an enemy.
I could care less what you think... save for the times that your thinking is turned into action which takes awayeveryone's rights, and Liberty and enslaves us... then we have a problem.
sv_libertarian
wrote:
Let me ask you one simple thing. Say Congress passes an unconstituional law, or a lesser government does, and attempts to enforce it, without a SCOTUS to rule otherwise, how do you expect to get it overturned by the courts? Or does your fantasy world demand everyone simply take up arms and overthrow the government?
You are now trolling. Your clearly not looking for an answer to your question, but rather you're trying to marginalize me by saying my beliefs are fantasy.
sv_libertarian
wrote:
I fail to see why you are here. You seem more interested in armed confrontation with government, or simply finding fault with anything that comes from government. Do you have a problem with authority figures?
The question I posed to AWD must have really hit a nerve with you... afraid of hiding behind your lie of a moniker? I do have a problem with "
authority figures" in the sheer fact that we were meant to be a peer based society where we elect "
representatives" and not "
leaders". You seem to hold to the belief that people need to be ruled or lorded over. I believe people generally are capable of taking care of themselves and that if our government was properly run, and the courts acted as they were intended, we would have a fairly well running system. But instead, we get chumps like you voting for the current chumps in office and then you both come after people like me for criticizing the fact that authoritarians have taken over and are slowly leeching away any semblance of freedom we once possessed.
Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty, and we as a people have dropped the ball. But enablers like yourself do nearly as much damage as those who continue to ignore the Constitution.
individual's right to his own life, to his own liberty, to the pursuit of his own happiness meaning that it isaman’s right to exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The idea's the founders put forth on individual rights are many and clearly stated.
sv_libertarian
wrote:
The peculiar notion that no court can determine if a law is constitutional, or interpret what the constitution says has no real meaning in historical jurisprudence or law, and is focused on what seems to be your desperate desire to object to anything done by the government.
As should any good citizen. Big government should never be trusted as time and time again, it has proved to be harmful to its citizens. If you were a Libertarian, which I think I have now exposed that you are not, you would know this and you would be as horrified at what they are doing in most State Capitols as well as in DC.
sv_libertarian
wrote:
Mussolinis or Stalins of the world who sought to impose their own twisted aims on society through similar means.
Your world has no true liberty or freedom, because in your world, only the strongman has the means to hold "freedom". Your constant thirst for conflict with government, and subtle hints of armed rebellion or resistance suggest a bloodlust and desire for violent revolution. You are no patriot, but rather a rabble rouser and common thug.
You sir are revolting and an odious presence in a community where people actually do believe in rule of law, liberty and freedom. You cower behind a weapon, and twisted words, and take company with others of your ilk. I will have nothing to do with you, or your twisted "liberty" because in your world, there is neither liberty, nor freedom.
[/quote]This last part is just sad really. You really are ignorant of our Constitution and the desires of the founders at the time of the framing and why the powers delegated were delegated the way they were... and why so many limits were placed on government.
I have no desire for violent revolution as if one were to happen, many peoplewould die including those I hold dear. Violent revolution is the last thing I would want to see happen, yet it is going to happen if we continue to mortgage our future and basically make us and our children slaves to our creditors. As the economy continues to shrink, and more people lose jobs, the spending of money will slow to such a rate that the taxes collected will only cover the interest on our country's debt... California is handing out IOUs instead of paychecks... what happens when the Federal Government is forced to do that?
Calling me a thug only adds further proof that you cannot form a decent argument or debate in a rational and polite manner. While I may slip at times due to the caustic nature of my debate opponent, I at least give you some respect which is something you have yet to do with me.
My claims that the purposeful obfuscation and muddying of the Constitutional waters is a treasonous act have not been refuted by you... because instead of trying to have a debate, you attack
ME personally trying to discredit what I say by discrediting me. That is a logical fallacy and you need to come up with a better argument. For example, if I just said "You are ignorant" and left it at that... it would be a bad argument as I did not qualify my statement that you are ignorant. However, if you read what I say about your ignorance, you can see that I qualify your ignorance rather than just name call. While you and others may disagree with my finding, at least I'm not posing a logical fallacy as my argument.