Rick Santorum and the Republican dichotomy of "government"

[The Rabbi]

The one in my pants, dipshit. Do you consider your dick state owned? Sorry to hear that.

OK, so very very little.
Actually none. There is no guaranteed right of privacy in the Constitution. You lose.

Once the Government LEgislates that I cannot wear a condom, I will fight the Government.

But to guys like you, tyranny is already here and you don't do shit but type on a message board. It's not because you're necessarily a *****, it's because you don't have the courage of your convictions.

Gov't mandates that you wear a seatbelt. How is that different?
At least you've dropped the pretense that gov't doesnt have the constitutional ability to do so, which is what Santorum is arguing.
You've lost Part One of this argument. Are you going for Part Two?

 

[Avatar4321]

You mean he actually believes the Constitution and what it really says? How horrible!

Seriously, just because a law is stupid doesn't mean it's unconstitutional.

Do you believe its constitutional for the government, state, local and or federal, to tell you how to have sex and to tell you you can't use condoms and other forms of birth control?

No.

The Federal Government has no authority whatsoever on the matter. That hasnt stopped the Supreme Court from granting it power.

But the States on the other hand have full power to do anything not allotted to the Federal Government or given to the people by that State's Constitution.

See, we have this system call Federalism where we have a Federal Constitution that limits the power of the Federal government and retains the rest of the power to the States. I know this division of power as was as the scope of it is foreign to you. But you really should learn about it. It is our system after all.

Oh and simply because the government has power doesnt mean that power should be exercised. And simply because a law is stupid doesnt make it unconstitutional. I know those are also difficult concepts for you. So please think them over.

 

[Avatar4321]

Do you believe its constitutional for the government, state, local and or federal, to tell you how to have sex and to tell you you can't use condoms and other forms of birth control?

Yes. WHy wouldn't it be? WHat article in the COnstitution would prohibit state governments from doing that?

I don't believe the Government has the right to tell me I can't wear a condom, gtfo.

Well, regardless of what you believe, the State governments do. They shouldn't be telling you that you can't wear a condom. But the fact that they have the power is inherent in the general powers they are supposed to exercise.

I say supposed to exercise because our system has been so corrupted that people dont really care which government is doing what anymore.

 

[Avatar4321]

There is nothing in the Constitution that tells me where and how to stick my dick in something, the Constitution doesn't regulate my dick. If you're ok with it that's you both most Americans are not.

It's a moot point anyway. It's not like youll get the opportunity.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't believe the Government has the right to tell me I can't wear a condom, gtfo.

Which article protects your right of privates?

The one in my pants, dipshit. Do you consider your dick state owned? Sorry to hear that.

So you think the Federal Government can regulate your health, but not your genitals?

now thats just messed up.

 

[Avatar4321]

4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Completely irrelevant to this discussion. No one is arguing for the government to search one's genitals (unless the TSA entered the conversation without me knowing) and no one is arguing that the government has power to seize your genitals.

 

[Avatar4321]

And you would be ok with having your dick regulated as long as its done by the states and not by the feds? You're a ******* retard.

Whether he or anyone else would be okay with it is irrelevant. The fact is the States have the power to regulate it. It's not unconstitutional by any intelligent standard.

Now if you dont want it to happen, you get involved in state politics and prevent it. Again, I know this is difficult for you, but simply because the State has a power doesn't mean the State needs to exercise it.

You refusal to wrap your head around the concept that just because a law is stupid doesn't mean it's unconstitutional just demonstrates your ignorance.

 

[Avatar4321]

State laws are legal as long as they fall within the limits of whats allowed in the Constitution, if you want Christian Talibanstards regulating your sex life as long as its done by state laws you're ******* retarded.

and there is nothing in the Constitution that prevents these laws. That's the point. They may be incredibly stupid, as I think they are. But they aren't unconstitutional.

Your corruption of the concept of what unconstitutional means is one of the biggest problems this nation has. It makes the Constitution irrelevant when you ignore it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Once the Government LEgislates that I cannot wear a condom, I will fight the Government.

But to guys like you, tyranny is already here and you don't do shit but type on a message board. It's not because you're necessarily a *****, it's because you don't have the courage of your convictions.

But you have no problems when it tells you what you can and cant grow in your backyard or what type of lightbulb you can own.

 

[Avatar4321]

Government mandating seatbelts is, in my mind, reasonable.

When they start coming at me about wearing a condom, well, I will reserve my full on fight for freedom until then or its equivalent.

So the new standard for what is constitutional or not is what you find reasonable? Seriously? What the hell is the point of writing down the Constitution? Why the heck arent the courts consulting you? And the legislatures?

 

[g5000]

Here is the crux of the biscuit:

Even though he would not personally vote for a ban on sodomy, he said, he thinks states should legally be able to pass them, because sodomy is not a constitutionally protected right.

The entire argument boils down to whether or not certain behaviors are a constitutional right.



What harm is caused to anyone if you **** your consenting wife in the ass?

None.

And we all know the sodomy laws are really anti-homosexual laws. The bigots went after gays, not married couples into anal sex.

No one is fooled by Santorum's argument. We all know Santorum is saying having gay sex is not a constitutional right and that banning it is A-OK with him.

He's being an asshole, pun intended.

That's why the gay community has made his name into a noun. Santorum is the liquid which is part lube and part shit and part sperm which comes out of someone's ass after they have been fucked in the ass.

 

[g5000]

If anal sex isn't a right, neither is ANY sex.

Nor is wearing the color red. Nor is being left-handed.

Show me the article in the Constitution which says you have the right to be left-handed.

Understand?

 

[The Rabbi]

If anal sex isn't a right, neither is ANY sex.

Nor is wearing the color red. Nor is being left-handed.

Show me the article in the Constitution which says you have the right to be left-handed.

Understand?

I think you're getting it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Government mandating seatbelts is, in my mind, reasonable.

When they start coming at me about wearing a condom, well, I will reserve my full on fight for freedom until then or its equivalent.

So the new standard for what is constitutional or not is what you find reasonable? Seriously? What the hell is the point of writing down the Constitution? Why the heck arent the courts consulting you? And the legislatures?

The hyperbole aside, I've always maintained that when I feel my freedom is being unreasonably infringed upon, I will fight for said freedom.

You and everyone else on the other hand who cry every day how we're a tyrranical socialist nation - I feel bad that you either lack the courage *or* the conviction to do the same.

The difference is I am fighting for my freedom. And yours too.

 

[bripat9643]

well, what's dubious is their claim that they want "small government"... they like big, sweeping, controlling government.... when it tells people what to do based on their religious beliefs...

but they looooooove small government when it comes to allowing this country to become a dickensian nightmare.

Name 5 laws that tell people what to do based on religion.

Now tell us how many regulations there are telling me how to run a business.

Which one should I be more concerned about?