Are you a conservative?

[P@triot]

The fed gov has no power to protect certain people. The govt should not be discriminatory. In any way. Its called the constitution.

 

[P@triot]

The fed gov has no power to protect certain people. The govt should not be discriminatory. In any way. Its called the constitution.

WC is claiming to want “equality” while celebrating the complete and total inequality of “protected classes”.

If the government is breaking down citizens into classes and then providing protection only for some of those classes (or additional protection for only some of those classes), that is the textbook definition of inequality.

It is outrageously unconstitutional.

 

[P@triot]

...and "protected class", cannot explain why the latter concept is "not even legal".

My bad. I operated under the assumption that those who would engage in a political message board such as USMB would be at least vaguely familiar with the U.S. Constitution. That is clearly not the case with you based on your post, so I’ll explain.

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That is the excerpt from the 14th Amendment. It states the government must treat all citizens 100% equal, without exception. If you’re a member of a “protected class” and I’m not, then we are not even close to being treated 100% equal. Hence, it is illegal.

 

[P@triot]

Not only are many of these clear evidence that the SC believes COTUS protects "certain people", but a number of amendments ought to be proof that it does

I can show you exactly where in the U.S. Constitution it states that everything you just said is 100% inaccurate. The 14th Amendment:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

It is quite telling that you are unable to point to a single section of the U.S. Constitution that supports your claim that the government should treat citizens unequal. Also odd that you’re celebrating that inaccurate belief considering you claim to oppose inequality. Very odd.

 

[Jitss617]

So how are you a democrat when democrats are for open Borders ?

Easy. They aren’t.

Lol they shut down the government for 5 billion for border security.. for areas that experts say we need border walls. They are against more Detention beds to hold illegals.. wha are you talking about... you are against border security you are for the destruction of poor American neighborhoods.

You need to look up the meaning of open borders.

We don’t have openings at the border? Are you on drugs?

Nope, but I have my suspicions about you.

So he’s going to build a wall where a wall is? Lol

 

[P@triot]

Moved to General Discussion, the thread is not keeping within the perimeters of the CDZ guidelines.

Just out of curiosity - why not suspend the account of the offenders for a day or two so that the rest of us can continue to have a civil discussion?

 

[Dale Smith]

In my mind I've categorized conservative into several sub-types. Help me, and others who are not conservatives which sub-type of conservative best defines you in terms of voting, domestic and foreign policies, and the wedge issues (guns, god, gays, taxes and abortion).

To be fair, I'll post why I'm a liberal Democrat:

• I have empathy for the working poor, the drug an alcohol dependent, the mentally ill, physically ill and the aged, children and animals;
• I abhor war and believe diplomacy can be an effective deterrent to war. Thus I oppose Brinkmanship, belligerence and bellicose rhetoric;
• I support the United Nations, NATO and joint missions into space with other nations, allies or otherwise;
• I support the Olympics, World Soccer and other competition wherein American's interact with others no matter their ethnicity, creed, sex or sexual orientation;
• I believe every American citizen should enjoy the same rights and opportunities as every other person;
• I support a Congress which supports Universal Suffrage for all citizens in every general election. [Those without a proper picture ID ought to be informed that their member of H. or Rep. will provide them at no cost a proper ID with evidence they were born in the US or are naturalized citizens];
• I support free public education, free preventative care for all citizens (age appropriate physical examinations, age appropriate inoculations and age appropriate curriculum in public schools on health and dental care, procreation and (age appropriate) means to prevent pregnancy and STD's.
• I support a US AG to remove Marijuana from schedule I, and add Tobacco to that schedule.

So, which type of conservative are you:

1. Callous Conservative
2. Fiscal Conservative
3. Social Conservative
4. Goldwater Conservative
5. Neoconservative
6. Single Issue voter:

• Guns
• Gays
• Taxes
• Abortion
• White Supremacist

.;o9asl

In my mind I've categorized conservative into several sub-types. Help me, and others who are not conservatives which sub-type of conservative best defines you in terms of voting, domestic and foreign policies, and the wedge issues (guns, god, gays, taxes and abortion).

To be fair, I'll post why I'm a liberal Democrat:

• I have empathy for the working poor, the drug an alcohol dependent, the mentally ill, physically ill and the aged, children and animals;
• I abhor war and believe diplomacy can be an effective deterrent to war. Thus I oppose Brinkmanship, belligerence and bellicose rhetoric;
• I support the United Nations, NATO and joint missions into space with other nations, allies or otherwise;
• I support the Olympics, World Soccer and other competition wherein American's interact with others no matter their ethnicity, creed, sex or sexual orientation;
• I believe every American citizen should enjoy the same rights and opportunities as every other person;
• I support a Congress which supports Universal Suffrage for all citizens in every general election. [Those without a proper picture ID ought to be informed that their member of H. or Rep. will provide them at no cost a proper ID with evidence they were born in the US or are naturalized citizens];
• I support free public education, free preventative care for all citizens (age appropriate physical examinations, age appropriate inoculations and age appropriate curriculum in public schools on health and dental care, procreation and (age appropriate) means to prevent pregnancy and STD's.
• I support a US AG to remove Marijuana from schedule I, and add Tobacco to that schedule.

So, which type of conservative are you:

1. Callous Conservative
2. Fiscal Conservative
3. Social Conservative
4. Goldwater Conservative
5. Neoconservative
6. Single Issue voter:

• Guns
• Gays
• Taxes
• Abortion
• White Supremacist

I am not sure as to what is more disgusting when it comes to you fabian socialists...the fact that those of your ilk are utterly clueless as to how things REALLY work and how your kind have been worked like a crack whore doing the bidding of the very elite class that you claim to be standing against? Or it could be that your hatred for those that stand against the "collective model" thus you are guided by no moral compass. There is no line in the sand that your kind will not cross, no deed is too disgusting or filthy if it furthers the goals of communism....as a matter of fact, it's considered a meritorious deed because the ends justifies the means.

I am a Constitutionalist that believes that the organic document lays it all out as to how we can self-govern. Little intellectual "wannabe" lightweights (such as yourself) love to put people in neat, little categories. Allow me to explain myself on terms even you should be able to understand.....my right to exist on this planet doesn't come from a benevolent "gubermint" that bestows privileges upon it's serfs and can take them away at their whim. You weep cyber tears about the "poor and downtrodden" but you have not the slightest clue as to how it happened. Your college texts about history were a total fabrication of reality and you were indoctrinated. In the event of a grid failure or any other catastrophic event that required "real life" skills? You would be a liability and "dead weight". You want change? Then BE the change and you can't ever accomplish that by remaining ignorant of our real history.

 

[Olde Europe]

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That is the excerpt from the 14th Amendment. It states the government must treat all citizens 100% equal, without exception.

No, it does not. Had you taken a second to think about it, it would have dawned on you that government treats toddlers and adults, criminals and law-abiding persons vastly differently, and that your understanding of the matter isn't merely defective, it's non-existent. But you didn't, and so it wouldn't.

 

[AsianTrumpSupporter]

I’m registered as a libertarian, but I used to vote for anyone who wasn’t a republican or a democrat. But that changed, and now I’m a Trump supporter and generally vote straight GOP. I have many reasons, but here’s one big one:

Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits, Suit Says

 

[gtopa1]

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That is the excerpt from the 14th Amendment. It states the government must treat all citizens 100% equal, without exception.

No, it does not. Had you taken a second to think about it, it would have dawned on you that government treats toddlers and adults, criminals and law-abiding persons vastly differently, and that your understanding of the matter isn't merely defective, it's non-existent. But you didn't, and so it wouldn't.

You seem to miss the meaning of the 14th; an easy error for someone who does not understand the meaning a native speaker brings to a text.

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Within the parameters of the Amendment we find:
1: cannot abridge the privileges or immunities of its citizens
2: deprive any person of life, liberty or property WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW
3: cannot deny the EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW.

As Laws may cover different people in different ways, eg, age of consent, attainment of maturity, mental state etc, as long as those Laws are executed with due process, and protections afforded according TO LAW then, frankly, thou art showing yourself to be quite ignorant not only of the Language but also of the Constitution you hold in contempt.

PS: The "all persons" bit may be a clue as to why you are in error.

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

I’m registered as a libertarian, but I used to vote for anyone who wasn’t a republican or a democrat. But that changed, and now I’m a Trump supporter and generally vote straight GOP. I have many reasons, but here’s one big one:

Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits, Suit Says

Are you, at heart, a Constitutional Monarchist?

Greg

 

[CrusaderFrank]

People are far more generous and compassionate than any government

 

[Otium]

Now, I have to admit, I have yet to find a suitable name for that kind of conservative, and I have yet to find a single one who would fit the bill on the national stage. Is there even one?

Apologies. I was interrupted and returned too late to edit the prior post.


So, I shall re-post.


Odd how an arrogant German would miss the obvious.


Albeit, given my view that you all still have to answer for WWI, WWII and the Holocaust, and you remain hell-bent on destroying Europe-- this time more passively via unbridled immigration of Muslims who despise Western culture, and seek to impose their inferior one wherever they land-- it may be understandable.


Perhaps in your search for American leader, and conservative icon, most responsible for your Eastern German brothers’ emancipation from the USSR.

It appears you are searching for a current leader that meets the criterion you iterated.

My avatar provides a clue.

 

[Otium]

- Standing up for racial, regional, gender equality - willing to put a stop to ever more inequality of income and wealth - following the Founders' promise of equality

FFS. Our founders did not refer to "equality" in wealth and income.

They were NOT communists like you, comrade.

The referred to equality under the law protecting one's inalienable God-given rights to self-determinism , justice and most of all the freedom to pursue HAPPINESS , however one pleases within the framework of society's laws.

I think you need to have a long talk with SGIAN about what our Founders promised and what they did not.

A Marxist utopia was NOT the vision of our founding fathers.

 

[PredFan]

I’m a Constitutional Conservative. I believe in strict interpretation of our Constitution.

I also believe in the individual, I believe in personal responsibility, I believe in small government, and states rights. I have empathy for those who suffer but only believe in opportunity instead of handouts.

I’m also a capitalist. I am against all welfare including corporate. I believe in a strong military but I don’t believe in colonialism or handouts to foreign nations.

The UN is a worthless organization.

 

[Mindful]

Now, I have to admit, I have yet to find a suitable name for that kind of conservative, and I have yet to find a single one who would fit the bill on the national stage. Is there even one?

Apologies. I was interrupted and returned too late to edit the prior post.


So, I shall re-post.


Odd how an arrogant German would miss the obvious.


Albeit, given my view that you all still have to answer for WWI, WWII and the Holocaust, and you remain hell-bent on destroying Europe-- this time more passively via unbridled immigration of Muslims who despise Western culture, and seek to impose their inferior one wherever they land-- it may be understandable.


Perhaps in your search for American leader, and conservative icon, most responsible for your Eastern German brothers’ emancipation from the USSR.

It appears you are searching for a current leader that meets the criterion you iterated.

My avatar provides a clue.

My issue is that some of these arrogant and condescending interlopers claim to know more about the US than Americans themselves.

 

[Mindful]

- Standing up for racial, regional, gender equality - willing to put a stop to ever more inequality of income and wealth - following the Founders' promise of equality

FFS. Our founders did not refer to "equality" in wealth and income.

They were NOT communists like you, comrade.

The referred to equality under the law protecting one's inalienable God-given rights to self-determinism , justice and most of all the freedom to pursue HAPPINESS , however one pleases within the framework of society's laws.

I think you need to have a long talk with SGIAN about what our Founders promised and what they did not.

A Marxist utopia was NOT the vision of our founding fathers.

He probably is having long talks with Sgian. Tutorials I'd call them.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

My issue is that some of these arrogant and condescending interlopers claim to know more about the US than Americans themselves.

…...and they seem to be of the opinion that their use of a hundred words when a dozen will do masks the fact they know nothing at all.

 

[Mindful]

My issue is that some of these arrogant and condescending interlopers claim to know more about the US than Americans themselves.

…...and they seem to be of the opinion that their use of a hundred words when a dozen will do masks the fact they know nothing at all.

I'll pm you about that.

 

[Wry Catcher]

• I abhor war and believe diplomacy can be an effective deterrent to war. Thus I oppose Brinkmanship, belligerence and bellicose rhetoric;

War is sometimes the only option when diplomacy fails.

War has been described as the failure of diplomacy - Brinkmanship and bellicose rhetoric are far and away from diplomatic decorum.