plainol...: No! If you can get a jury of your peers to support your
innocence in a "crime", then the consensus of the masses can bestow
rights. However, having the approval of the unconstitutional party
that happens to be in power at the moment can't bestow "rights" such
as getting a free home and having free health care. Any "consensus"
must include those people who are actually paying the bills, and even
if the latter are only 10% of the population, nothing can get done,
nor "rights" granted, without the consent of the governed! — John A.
Armistead —
On Sep 14, 4:54 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> they don't exist except in the mind of the relgious
>
> On Sep 13, 3:25 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Again, I ask you, where do they come from?
>
> > You've yet to answer.
>
> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:54 PM, plainolamerican
> > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > Unalienable rights come from the moral consensus of
> > > the People.
> > > ---
> > > religious people
>
> > > On Sep 12, 6:02 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > On Sep 10, 1:26 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:>
> > > All unalienable rights are from God.
>
> > > > No, plainol...: Unalienable rights come from the moral consensus of
> > > > the People. But such sounds more immutable, if the language refers to
> > > > 'God', or "Mother Nature', or more correctly, to all of the natural
> > > > laws of the Universe. — J. A. A. —> ---
>
> > > > > speculation noted
>
> > > > > On Sep 10, 11:18 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hello John,
>
> > > > > > Although it was difficult to get through that long winded
> > > disortation,
> > > > > > (reminds me of someone who graduated from Clemson!) and I agree
> > > that the
> > > > > > Obama Administration has by executive order installed
> > > unconstitutional,
> > > > > > communistic mandates upon "We, The People"; I am at a loss as to
> > > how you
> > > > > > believe that our two party system is unconstitutional.
>
> > > > > > Far from it.
>
> > > > > > There is nothing in the Constitution, (or maybe you can point out
> > > the
> > > > > > Article and paragraph for us?) that restricts the association of
> > > like
> > > > > > minded politically thinking individuals from forming associations or
> > > groups
> > > > > > to further their political cause.
>
> > > > > > I also take exception to your notion that the "weak govern the
> > > strong".
> > > > > > Examples please. With regard to bias within the law.....Yes. It's
> > > true,
> > > > > > and has been since the beginning of recorded history. The United
> > > States is
> > > > > > no exception, and I can cite numerous instances within our 235 year
> > > > > > history, beginning with the "Shea's Rebellion" of bias contained
> > > within
> > > > > > the law. To some degree, it is these "biases" that you refer to,
> > > that
> > > > > > shape and form our "culture" and our "morals".
>
> > > > > > All unalienable rights are from God, not government and they cannot
> > > be
> > > > > > stripped by government, unless one "volunteers" to waive his God
> > > given
> > > > > > unalienable right.
>
> > > > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 1:46 PM, NoEinstein <
> > > noeinst...@bellsouth.net>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Yes, Studio, but "the two major political parties" are 100%
> > > > > > > UNCONSTITUTIONAL under our present Constitution! The USA isn't a
> > > > > > > democracy, but is supposed to be (but never has been) a
> > > Representative
> > > > > > > Republic. The Founding Fathers were totally committed to the
> > > > > > > principle that the PEOPLE control government. Nowhere in the
> > > > > > > Constitution is it sanctioned to allow political parties to
> > > substitute
> > > > > > > biased group power for the "close to a Democracy" power of the
> > > voters
> > > > > > > on election day. Yes, there were Whigs and Tories in the 18th
> > > > > > > century. But those were mechanisms for government control far
> > > > > > > different from a Representative Republic! Note: That treasonous
> > > > > > > BASTARD in the White House, Barack H. Obama, still supposes that
> > > the
> > > > > > > USA is "our great Democracy", while he acts as our
> > > communist-socialist
> > > > > > > dictator. As numbers of you have pointed out a year or two ago,
> > > > > > > Democracies—if that's the only stipulated 'control' of
> > > government—will
> > > > > > > allow the weak to control the strong. And that isn't just if it is
> > > > > > > like: two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for supper. Having
> > > > > > > controls in the Constitution that mandate justice and fairness will
> > > > > > > allow the voters to decide controversial issues WITHIN the bounds
> > > of
> > > > > > > justice and fairness. No biased group gets to define justice and
> > > > > > > fairness so as to allow them to exploit others for their own
> > > selfish
> > > > > > > gain. The best route to saving the USA, as well as our entire
> > > > > > > socioeconomic system, is to strip all biased groups of power over
> > > the
> > > > > > > course of government. Once that happens, there won't be any more
> > > > > > > pressure to have governments become all things for all people,
> > > which
> > > > > > > as we should know by now ( but Obama doesn't), doesn't work! —
> > > John
> > > > > > > A. Armistead —
>
> > > > > > > On Sep 6, 11:48 am, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sep 5, 5:39 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Dear Studio:
> > > > > > > > > Since both of those are issues of
> > > > > > > > > high controversy, the American People should be allowed to
> > > decide once
> > > > > > > > > and for all in direct referenda.
>
> > > > > > > > I'm in TOTAL agreement with that!
> > > > > > > > However, Republitards will remind you we live in a Republic, not
> > > a
> > > > > > > > Democracy.
> > > > > > > > And neither of the 2 major parties actually want people to
> > > decide by
> > > > > > > > referendum.
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > > > For options & help seehttp://
> > > groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > --
> > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment