Constitutional Amendments are no longer absolute?

[Camp]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited. You are, as always, ignorant of what the Constitution says.

Where did you find your misinformation?

The federalist's papers.

Where did you find yours?

Never mind. You're an extremist and your opinion is worthless.

You disagree with both liberal and conservative justices, past and present and you distort and misinterpret the federalist papers.

How does he misinterpret the federalist papers ?

Justices, especially Justice Scalia believe, or in Scalia's case believed, there were no absolutes in the Constitution. I believe they and he can be considered as experts.

So you really don't read questions.

You just say what you need to.

Or do you believe Scalia was associated with the Federalist Papers.

Read Majority Report by Justice Scalia District of Columbia vs Heller

 

[MadChemist]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited. You are, as always, ignorant of what the Constitution says.

Where did you find your misinformation?

The federalist's papers.

Where did you find yours?

Never mind. You're an extremist and your opinion is worthless.

You disagree with both liberal and conservative justices, past and present and you distort and misinterpret the federalist papers.

How does he misinterpret the federalist papers ?

Justices, especially Justice Scalia believe, or in Scalia's case believed, there were no absolutes in the Constitution. I believe they and he can be considered as experts.

So you really don't read questions.

You just say what you need to.

Or do you believe Scalia was associated with the Federalist Papers.

Read Majority Report by Justice Scalia District of Columbia vs Heller

My question was how did the poster misinterpret the federalist papers.

Can you answer that please.

 

[Darkwind]

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited.

Your antic definition of government necessarily negates government.

Universal self-indulgence is hardly the hallmark of any advanced society.

What?

The Constitution is written to negate universal self-indulgence.

The process to amend the Constitution is deliberately difficult. Fads, whims, and Marxist/Socialist/Communist mentalities are flash in the pan concepts that are harmful and the Founding Fathers set forth to make it exceedingly hard for these kinds of 'societal' changes to happen.

Slow and deliberate is the correct path.

History shows us that governments are harmful and universally corrupt. That is why individual rights are supreme and exceed the power of government. This was the intentional condition of our country.

Universal self-indulgence was not the objective of the Founding Fathers, nor would it be possible since individual rights are necessarily circumscribed by the rights of others in this or any society.

Do some extremists attempt to arrogate individual freedoms to the State? Indeed. Women and their wombs are a perennial target. Freedom-loving folks must be vigilant in repelling such Statist usurpations.

Wow. Others do NOT circumscribe MY rights, ever.

 

[Darkwind]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited. You are, as always, ignorant of what the Constitution says.

Where did you find your misinformation?

The federalist's papers.

Where did you find yours?

Never mind. You're an extremist and your opinion is worthless.

You disagree with both liberal and conservative justices, past and present and you distort and misinterpret the federalist papers.

How does he misinterpret the federalist papers ?

I don't, but he has an extremist view of the world so I don't really care what he thinks.

 

[MadChemist]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited. You are, as always, ignorant of what the Constitution says.

Where did you find your misinformation?

The federalist's papers.

Where did you find yours?

Never mind. You're an extremist and your opinion is worthless.

You disagree with both liberal and conservative justices, past and present and you distort and misinterpret the federalist papers.

How does he misinterpret the federalist papers ?

I don't, but he has an extremist view of the world so I don't really care what he thinks.

It would be nice if he could, at least, lay out his argument.

 

[Darkwind]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited. You are, as always, ignorant of what the Constitution says.

Where did you find your misinformation?

The federalist's papers.

Where did you find yours?

Never mind. You're an extremist and your opinion is worthless.

You disagree with both liberal and conservative justices, past and present and you distort and misinterpret the federalist papers.

How does he misinterpret the federalist papers ?

I don't, but he has an extremist view of the world so I don't really care what he thinks.

It would be nice if he could, at least, lay out his argument.

That is a long wait for a train that doesn't ever come. He never has as far as I've ever seen.

 

[konradv]

View attachment 478719

Thoughts?

They have never been absolute. For example, people lose their voting, and gun rights if they have committed certain crimes....additionally, people who are committed can lose their gun rights.

There are also numerous exceptions to search warrants

The key here is due process must happen first and foremost.

This means states can change their voting ages to 25, yes?

No, a State law can't override the US Constitution, which sets the age at 18.

How can you help but override amendments that aren't absolute?

I am not sure what you are asking

If an amendment doesn't mean anything concrete, then how does a state know its overriding it? Everyone can have their own interpretation.

No, everyone can have the USSC's interpretation.

So you believe the SC is infallible?

No, but it's the best we've got, better than message board randos.

 

[konradv]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

Sorry, NAZI, but the Bill of Rights is the law, not a guideline. The government has no authority to place such limits. In fact the BOR was created specifically to tell the government what it cannot do. What restriction comports with "shall not be abridged?"

Depends if you're talking the people or an individual, in which case: no, yes.

Could you translate that into English?

I think you're the one that needs a refresher. English goes way beyond FU. Time to broaden your horizons.

 

[Mac-7]

And good for us that they had the foresight to know that nothing is forever. Adaptability like flexibility is good thing.

Ok

gun grabbers should propose changes to the 2nd amendment and go through the process to change it

which libs know would fail

so they want to have the unelected judges change it for them

 

[AFrench2]

Congrats, I just had a brain aneurysm from reading this bullshit. Time to go to the hospital

 

[schmidlap]

Wow. Others do NOT circumscribe MY rights, ever.

Of course they do. Your are not exempt from the agreed-upon societal conventions and legal requirements that apply to everyone else in the U.S.

You may take a fancy to driving on the lefthand side of the highway some day because it's sunnier on that side, but your phototropic proclivities do not negate the laws to which you are subject.

Behave yourself!

 

[Dana7360]

View attachment 478719

Thoughts?

You have a lot of nerve posting that.

You don't give a damn about most of the amendments to our constitution. All you care about is the second and only part of the first.

The rest you trash and don't give a flying fig about.

When you people respect and care about the WHOLE constitution I'll actually take you seriously.

Which I don't ever expect that to happen with you.

 

[Dana7360]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited. You are, as always, ignorant of what the Constitution says.

Where did you find your misinformation?

Wow I can't believe that the conservatives are posting these things.

They've worked since the early 70s to take women's right to privacy with their body and papers from them along with taking women's HIPAA rights away.

They will stop at nothing to take those rights from women. They will never stop until they succeed.

They spent decades complaining about "big government nanny" I knew the whole time they used that phrase to not properly financially support our nation. When it comes to people's rights, the conservatives love big government nanny taking control of our lives.

 

[bripat9643]

View attachment 478719

Thoughts?

They have never been absolute. For example, people lose their voting, and gun rights if they have committed certain crimes....additionally, people who are committed can lose their gun rights.

There are also numerous exceptions to search warrants

The key here is due process must happen first and foremost.

This means states can change their voting ages to 25, yes?

No, a State law can't override the US Constitution, which sets the age at 18.

How can you help but override amendments that aren't absolute?

I am not sure what you are asking

If an amendment doesn't mean anything concrete, then how does a state know its overriding it? Everyone can have their own interpretation.

No, everyone can have the USSC's interpretation.

So you believe the SC is infallible?

No, but it's the best we've got, better than message board randos.

Thanks for admitting that the SC is often wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

Sorry, NAZI, but the Bill of Rights is the law, not a guideline. The government has no authority to place such limits. In fact the BOR was created specifically to tell the government what it cannot do. What restriction comports with "shall not be abridged?"

Depends if you're talking the people or an individual, in which case: no, yes.

Could you translate that into English?

I think you're the one that needs a refresher. English goes way beyond FU. Time to broaden your horizons.

Perhaps, but that's all you deserve.

 

[Darkwind]

Wow. Others do NOT circumscribe MY rights, ever.

Of course they do. Your are not exempt from the agreed-upon societal conventions and legal requirements that apply to everyone else in the U.S.

You may take a fancy to driving on the lefthand side of the highway some day because it's sunnier on that side, but your phototropic proclivities do not negate the laws to which you are subject.

Behave yourself!

lmao

When you have to pick ridiculous examples, you've lost the argument.

 

[Darkwind]

It’s remarkable how ignorant most conservatives are concerning American governance and law; indeed, that ignorance is what makes a conservative a conservative – this thread being one of many examples of that.

No right is absolute or unlimited; government has the authority to place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights provided those limits and restrictions comport with the Constitution.

That these fundamental tenets of American governance and law must be explained to conservatives is what makes conservatism such a danger to the American nation.

The government's responsibility is to ensure that our rights are not limited. You are, as always, ignorant of what the Constitution says.

Where did you find your misinformation?

Wow I can't believe that the conservatives are posting these things.

They've worked since the early 70s to take women's right to privacy with their body and papers from them along with taking women's HIPAA rights away.

They will stop at nothing to take those rights from women. They will never stop until they succeed.

They spent decades complaining about "big government nanny" I knew the whole time they used that phrase to not properly financially support our nation. When it comes to people's rights, the conservatives love big government nanny taking control of our lives.

They have done no such thing. That is the dishonesty of the left in how they frame the issue.

Killing innocent people has been illegal in the world for about 3 thousand years.

 

[schmidlap]

When you have to pick ridiculous examples, you've lost the argument.

You may not like it, but the fact remains that you are not exempt from the agreed-upon societal conventions and legal requirements that apply to everyone else in the U.S.

Behave yourself.

 

[Darkwind]

When you have to pick ridiculous examples, you've lost the argument.

You may not like it, but the fact remains that you are not exempt from the agreed-upon societal conventions and legal requirements that apply to everyone else in the U.S.

Behave yourself.

You too are required to abide by the agreed-upon social conventions outlined in the Constitution.

Which states that government will NOT infringe upon the rights of the citizens.

There are consequences for such.

Behave yourself.

Enforce the restrictions on the government. My rights do NOT come from the government.

Pretty simple concept. I suggest you grow up and learn it.

 

[schmidlap]

You too are required to abide by the agreed-upon social conventions outlined in the Constitution...

Of course. You make my point. No citizen is exempt.

Anyone who claims, "Others do NOT circumscribe MY rights, ever" is being very silly.

Society institutes laws they are required to obey.