"Rights are special privileges the government gives you."

[BluesLegend]

the point is that rights are given by governments. we have a right to free speech. not everyone country has that. freedom of religion/press/assembly? that's not universal. right to bear arms? nope. equal protection? please.

so what's the problem again?

Nope. The founding Fathers said it, our rights are given by God. Whether or not libtards socialists say otherwise makes no difference.

That's like acid rain to the left.

Since there is no proof of the existence of God, there can be no proof that rights are God given.

Yet the people who founded this country believed that rights were divinely vouchsafed.

You fake christians have a way of ignoring facts. Not all of the "founding fathers" believed in an magical, invisible sky fairy but many of them did fight for their freedom.

No "god" has ever given anything to any one. You're welcome to believe otherwise but it has always been human blood that has been given and taken in the fight for freedom.

Obama believes in God and my guess is you voted for the clown.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

ROFLMNAO!

Talk about a shill for idiocy.

'Ebola' has been debunked?

LMAO! Folks, you can NOT make this crap up.

Roflmnao, the automatic response used by the illiterate and the unintelligent.

How so scamp? And please be as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

You're only capable of answering questions with buzzwords. Can't too much more specific about roflmnao

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Allowing a buzzword to be a response is conceding? Ok, have it your way, go find your keys why dontcha?

No, failure to sustain an effective opposition is conceding. As it yields to the standing point(s).

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Our rights are inalienable, they manifest as a consequence of our humanity; they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable our rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government: “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.” (DC v. Heller (2008)). The Constitution and its case law establishes the boundaries government may not cross when seeking to place restrictions on citizens' liberties, while at the same time affords the citizen an understanding as to the limits of his rights in a free and democratic society, where the Constitution both authorizes government to limit one's civil liberties and protects the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances, seeking relief in the Federal courts.

It is this constant struggle, therefore, between government and governed – government always probing the Constitutional edifice for weaknesses to exploit, and citizens opposing government overreach in the neutral venue of the courts – that a free, just, and viable society is maintained.

This is such nonsense... Rights are not absolute and this is without regard to government whimsy.

I am entitled to do whatever the hell I feel is necessary to fulfill my life, as along as my exercise of that rightful behavior does not infringe upon the means of another to exercise their own rights.

If I need a double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads, and bolted onto a supersonic fighter jet, then I am entitled, on no less an authority then the Creator of the Universe to possess such... but I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO SUCH AT THE EXPENSE OF SO MUCH AS A SINGLE INNOCENT LIFE...

Just as I am entitled to have sexual intercourse with anyone I can talk into it, as long as I am prepared to bear the responsibilities that come as a consequence of engaging in the behavior which nature designed SPECIFICALLY for PROCREATION, thus where a child is conceived, my RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN COITUS RESTS ENTIRELY UPON MY BEARING THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SUSTAIN THE LIFE I CONCEIVED.

I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO ENGAGE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND TO DESTROY THE LIFE THAT I CONCEIVED BECAUSE SUCH IS AN INCONVENIENCE!

See how that works?

I do not get my rights from the Government, thus I do not consult the government in the exercising of my rights... in no way and on no level.

My rights are not negotiable, I will not compromise on the exercising of them and I will not tolerate another exercising their would-be right at the expense of my means to exercise my own.

Because I am an American and that... is how we roll.

What convoluted, tortured logic .... clearly, you don't even understand what your rights are, nor do you understand the social contract inherent in those rights.

Rights are absolute ... until you grasp that, you'll never understand. "double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads" is not a right ... but, I'll leave you to figure that out.

(Look out, folks, here's where they trot out the "but you believe in the Second Amendment" rights BS - hoping to catch me in a massive faux pas)

Have you ever seen a double barrel howitzer that shoots nuclear ordinance? If you did you'd be saying, "Damn, I want one!" too.

Personally, i use mine for hunting rabbits ... gotta kill a lot of those suckers to get a pot full, though.

KILL THE WABBITS! KILL THE WABBITS! KILL THE WABBITS!

 

[jasonnfree]

So ... Jason... I ask again. Do any of those American principle feel familiar to ya?

Not really. I consider most of what you say patriotic b.s., not trying to be rude or anything. The founders didn't intend for the common man to have too much of a say in governing to begin with. Patriotic words fill a guy with pride, which is great when you need recruits for war, for example.

No legitimate response, so changing the subject? We can address the fallacy of this, too, if you like.

How am I changing the subject. I gave you my version of patriotism and the american experience.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Nope. The founding Fathers said it, our rights are given by God. Whether or not libtards socialists say otherwise makes no difference.

That's like acid rain to the left.

Since there is no proof of the existence of God, there can be no proof that rights are God given.

Yet the people who founded this country believed that rights were divinely vouchsafed.

You fake christians have a way of ignoring facts. Not all of the "founding fathers" believed in an magical, invisible sky fairy but many of them did fight for their freedom.

No "god" has ever given anything to any one. You're welcome to believe otherwise but it has always been human blood that has been given and taken in the fight for freedom.

Obama believes in God and my guess is you voted for the clown.

"Allah"... a cult fabrication deceitfully designed to influence the sheep humping ignorant.

 

[jasonnfree]

Roflmnao, the automatic response used by the illiterate and the unintelligent.

How so scamp? And please be as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

You're only capable of answering questions with buzzwords. Can't too much more specific about roflmnao

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Allowing a buzzword to be a response is conceding? Ok, have it your way, go find your keys why dontcha?

No, failure to sustain an effective opposition is conceding. As it yields to the standing point(s).

Now you're trying to sound like a lawyer. talk normal, you're not impressing me.

 

[jasonnfree]

Remember how outraged republicans were at the occupy wall street protesters for trying to exercise their free speech? Same with the right wing hatred of the protesters during the Vietnam war.

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

What are the principles that define America and how should I adhere to them?

You can't be serious?

May I ask what country you were born to and which you are a citizen of?

So you can't explain what the principles are that define america, so you change the subject.

I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to respond anyway ...

What principles define America?

Let's start at the top -

Self Determination.

The whole context of the American experiment is based on the premise that each person should be able to determine his future, and his happiness. Neither the government, nor other citizens, should have ability to interfere with an individual's pursuit of happiness. Onerous, and unnecessary, regulation and control violates that precept.

Self Responsibility

The American experiment is also rooted in the belief that each citizen is not only capable of caring for himself, but has the innate responsibility to do so. Each citizen should be rewarded - good or bad - for the results of his own activity. If he succeeds, he succeeds - but if he fails, he fails. In either case, he must bear the responsibility, and the results, of his own performance. Thomas Jefferson said, "“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Self Control

For the first time in history, the American experiment believed that every citizen is capable of controlling his actions, and as such, should be responsible for the impact of the results of those actions on others. Ronald Reagan said, "“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”

Self Government

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them. The government of the US must be made to be subservient to the citizenry. Someone once said, "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

The whole American experiment hinges on the belief that people are smart enough, strong enough, and good enough to exercise control over their government and their society.

Once you accept these pillars, you will have context to understand the documents that implement these concepts.

Sorry --- you can go back to the childish arguing and mindless pissing contests that masquerade as discussion.

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them.

So you wish to be controlled by the collective wisdom of the people, taking for granted that that wisdom is correct? Is this to childish of a question for you to answer?

BINGO!!! You, and Mr. Gruber, have let the cat out of the bag ... you have demonstrated the inherent bias, the poison, of the liberal left ... that YOU know better .. that YOU are smarter than everybody else ... that the average person is incapable of making these highly complex and profound decisions ... so they should just leave it to the elite class to handle it for them. You don't want citizens ... you want lemmings.

Now, to answer your question ... you DAMN right I believe in the collective wisdom of the American people, versus a small group of disconnected, disaffected, and dishonest elitists who so profoundly believe in their inherent superiority that they dare to even ask such a stupid question.

Oh, by the way, that collective wisdom of the people? I get to participate in it. THAT is what makes it smarter - LOL!

I hope I was clear.

I do have a question, who are these elitists you talk about?

 

[Spare_change]

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

You can't be serious?

May I ask what country you were born to and which you are a citizen of?

So you can't explain what the principles are that define america, so you change the subject.

I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to respond anyway ...

What principles define America?

Let's start at the top -

Self Determination.

The whole context of the American experiment is based on the premise that each person should be able to determine his future, and his happiness. Neither the government, nor other citizens, should have ability to interfere with an individual's pursuit of happiness. Onerous, and unnecessary, regulation and control violates that precept.

Self Responsibility

The American experiment is also rooted in the belief that each citizen is not only capable of caring for himself, but has the innate responsibility to do so. Each citizen should be rewarded - good or bad - for the results of his own activity. If he succeeds, he succeeds - but if he fails, he fails. In either case, he must bear the responsibility, and the results, of his own performance. Thomas Jefferson said, "“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Self Control

For the first time in history, the American experiment believed that every citizen is capable of controlling his actions, and as such, should be responsible for the impact of the results of those actions on others. Ronald Reagan said, "“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”

Self Government

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them. The government of the US must be made to be subservient to the citizenry. Someone once said, "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

The whole American experiment hinges on the belief that people are smart enough, strong enough, and good enough to exercise control over their government and their society.

Once you accept these pillars, you will have context to understand the documents that implement these concepts.

Sorry --- you can go back to the childish arguing and mindless pissing contests that masquerade as discussion.

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them.

So you wish to be controlled by the collective wisdom of the people, taking for granted that that wisdom is correct? Is this to childish of a question for you to answer?

BINGO!!! You, and Mr. Gruber, have let the cat out of the bag ... you have demonstrated the inherent bias, the poison, of the liberal left ... that YOU know better .. that YOU are smarter than everybody else ... that the average person is incapable of making these highly complex and profound decisions ... so they should just leave it to the elite class to handle it for them. You don't want citizens ... you want lemmings.

Now, to answer your question ... you DAMN right I believe in the collective wisdom of the American people, versus a small group of disconnected, disaffected, and dishonest elitists who so profoundly believe in their inherent superiority that they dare to even ask such a stupid question.

Oh, by the way, that collective wisdom of the people? I get to participate in it. THAT is what makes it smarter - LOL!

I hope I was clear.

I do have a question, who are these elitists you talk about?

You.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Our rights are inalienable, they manifest as a consequence of our humanity; they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable our rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government: “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.” (DC v. Heller (2008)). The Constitution and its case law establishes the boundaries government may not cross when seeking to place restrictions on citizens' liberties, while at the same time affords the citizen an understanding as to the limits of his rights in a free and democratic society, where the Constitution both authorizes government to limit one's civil liberties and protects the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances, seeking relief in the Federal courts.

It is this constant struggle, therefore, between government and governed – government always probing the Constitutional edifice for weaknesses to exploit, and citizens opposing government overreach in the neutral venue of the courts – that a free, just, and viable society is maintained.

This is such nonsense... Rights are not absolute and this is without regard to government whimsy.

I am entitled to do whatever the hell I feel is necessary to fulfill my life, as along as my exercise of that rightful behavior does not infringe upon the means of another to exercise their own rights.

If I need a double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads, and bolted onto a supersonic fighter jet, then I am entitled, on no less an authority then the Creator of the Universe to possess such... but I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO SUCH AT THE EXPENSE OF SO MUCH AS A SINGLE INNOCENT LIFE...

Just as I am entitled to have sexual intercourse with anyone I can talk into it, as long as I am prepared to bear the responsibilities that come as a consequence of engaging in the behavior which nature designed SPECIFICALLY for PROCREATION, thus where a child is conceived, my RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN COITUS RESTS ENTIRELY UPON MY BEARING THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SUSTAIN THE LIFE I CONCEIVED.

I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO ENGAGE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND TO DESTROY THE LIFE THAT I CONCEIVED BECAUSE SUCH IS AN INCONVENIENCE!

See how that works?

I do not get my rights from the Government, thus I do not consult the government in the exercising of my rights... in no way and on no level.

My rights are not negotiable, I will not compromise on the exercising of them and I will not tolerate another exercising their would-be right at the expense of my means to exercise my own.

Because I am an American and that... is how we roll.

What convoluted, tortured logic .... clearly, you don't even understand what your rights are, nor do you understand the social contract inherent in those rights.

Rights are absolute ... until you grasp that, you'll never understand. "double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads" is not a right ... but, I'll leave you to figure that out.

(Look out, folks, here's where they trot out the "but you believe in the Second Amendment" rights BS - hoping to catch me in a massive faux pas)

There's no such thing as a social contract.

I am an individual, sovereign unto myself... endowed by my creator with rights SO CERTAIN that they are inseparable from my very being. I am equal before my creator to every other individual on this planet, valued no higher or lower than anyone else.

Therefore, as a result of the gift of my life, I am entitled to fulfill that life to the extent of my means and that entitlement is BASED UPON my doing so without infringing upon the means of ANOTHER TO EXERCISE THEIR OWN RIGHTS.

THAT is the means by which my right to claim such, rests and by which it is sustained. And that is the ONLY potential means for such to exist, it is the basis in reasoning which the entire thesis of human rights rests. It is the core of viability which sustains American principle.

And it is not a complex equation.

In no uncertain terms my rights are limited to ME... therefore my rights are NOT ABSOLUTE! Except where I am entitled to exercise them without the burden of needing another individual's permission. What's MORE: WHERE I FAIL TO BEAR MY RESPONSIBILITY TO NOT INFRINGE UPON ANOTHER'S RIGHT TO EXERCISE THEIR OWN RIGHTS! I FORFEIT MY RIGHT(S).

I hold that truth as self evident, meaning that I recognize such for myself and for you and everyone else. And I hold you all to account o that basis... without regard to whether or not you 'believe in it', accept it or reject it.

Where you fail to bear your responsibility to not exercise your rights to the detriment of my means to exercise mine, you will find out RIGHT THEN, what it feels like when you forfeit your rights. As the penalty is delivered immediately, with prejudice and without apology.

As I said, I do seek permission, I do not ask for quarter and I do not grant any.

Like it, approve, don't like it, disapprove... I could not care less. THAT is just how it IS.

 

[jasonnfree]

So you can't explain what the principles are that define america, so you change the subject.

I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to respond anyway ...

What principles define America?

Let's start at the top -

Self Determination.

The whole context of the American experiment is based on the premise that each person should be able to determine his future, and his happiness. Neither the government, nor other citizens, should have ability to interfere with an individual's pursuit of happiness. Onerous, and unnecessary, regulation and control violates that precept.

Self Responsibility

The American experiment is also rooted in the belief that each citizen is not only capable of caring for himself, but has the innate responsibility to do so. Each citizen should be rewarded - good or bad - for the results of his own activity. If he succeeds, he succeeds - but if he fails, he fails. In either case, he must bear the responsibility, and the results, of his own performance. Thomas Jefferson said, "“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Self Control

For the first time in history, the American experiment believed that every citizen is capable of controlling his actions, and as such, should be responsible for the impact of the results of those actions on others. Ronald Reagan said, "“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”

Self Government

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them. The government of the US must be made to be subservient to the citizenry. Someone once said, "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

The whole American experiment hinges on the belief that people are smart enough, strong enough, and good enough to exercise control over their government and their society.

Once you accept these pillars, you will have context to understand the documents that implement these concepts.

Sorry --- you can go back to the childish arguing and mindless pissing contests that masquerade as discussion.

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them.

So you wish to be controlled by the collective wisdom of the people, taking for granted that that wisdom is correct? Is this to childish of a question for you to answer?

BINGO!!! You, and Mr. Gruber, have let the cat out of the bag ... you have demonstrated the inherent bias, the poison, of the liberal left ... that YOU know better .. that YOU are smarter than everybody else ... that the average person is incapable of making these highly complex and profound decisions ... so they should just leave it to the elite class to handle it for them. You don't want citizens ... you want lemmings.

Now, to answer your question ... you DAMN right I believe in the collective wisdom of the American people, versus a small group of disconnected, disaffected, and dishonest elitists who so profoundly believe in their inherent superiority that they dare to even ask such a stupid question.

Oh, by the way, that collective wisdom of the people? I get to participate in it. THAT is what makes it smarter - LOL!

I hope I was clear.

I do have a question, who are these elitists you talk about?

You.

Tell me how. My conversation was with the key guy about occupy wall street. You got in the conversation, muddied the waters with excessive verbiage , so I really need reminding about how I was being elitist/

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Have you ever seen a double barrel howitzer that shoots nuclear ordinance? If you did you'd be saying, "Damn, I want one!" too.

Right?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

How so scamp? And please be as specific as your intellectual limitations allow.

You're only capable of answering questions with buzzwords. Can't too much more specific about roflmnao

Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

Allowing a buzzword to be a response is conceding? Ok, have it your way, go find your keys why dontcha?

No, failure to sustain an effective opposition is conceding. As it yields to the standing point(s).

Now you're trying to sound like a lawyer. talk normal, you're not impressing me.

Well good. Because it's not designed to impress you. Its designed to convey the message. And by the looks of it, we're looking at: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

 

[ChrisL]

Our rights are inalienable, they manifest as a consequence of our humanity; they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable our rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government: “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.” (DC v. Heller (2008)). The Constitution and its case law establishes the boundaries government may not cross when seeking to place restrictions on citizens' liberties, while at the same time affords the citizen an understanding as to the limits of his rights in a free and democratic society, where the Constitution both authorizes government to limit one's civil liberties and protects the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances, seeking relief in the Federal courts.

It is this constant struggle, therefore, between government and governed – government always probing the Constitutional edifice for weaknesses to exploit, and citizens opposing government overreach in the neutral venue of the courts – that a free, just, and viable society is maintained.

This is such nonsense... Rights are not absolute and this is without regard to government whimsy.

I am entitled to do whatever the hell I feel is necessary to fulfill my life, as along as my exercise of that rightful behavior does not infringe upon the means of another to exercise their own rights.

If I need a double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads, and bolted onto a supersonic fighter jet, then I am entitled, on no less an authority then the Creator of the Universe to possess such... but I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO SUCH AT THE EXPENSE OF SO MUCH AS A SINGLE INNOCENT LIFE...

Just as I am entitled to have sexual intercourse with anyone I can talk into it, as long as I am prepared to bear the responsibilities that come as a consequence of engaging in the behavior which nature designed SPECIFICALLY for PROCREATION, thus where a child is conceived, my RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN COITUS RESTS ENTIRELY UPON MY BEARING THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SUSTAIN THE LIFE I CONCEIVED.

I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO ENGAGE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND TO DESTROY THE LIFE THAT I CONCEIVED BECAUSE SUCH IS AN INCONVENIENCE!

See how that works?

I do not get my rights from the Government, thus I do not consult the government in the exercising of my rights... in no way and on no level.

My rights are not negotiable, I will not compromise on the exercising of them and I will not tolerate another exercising their would-be right at the expense of my means to exercise my own.

Because I am an American and that... is how we roll.

What convoluted, tortured logic .... clearly, you don't even understand what your rights are, nor do you understand the social contract inherent in those rights.

Rights are absolute ... until you grasp that, you'll never understand. "double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads" is not a right ... but, I'll leave you to figure that out.

(Look out, folks, here's where they trot out the "but you believe in the Second Amendment" rights BS - hoping to catch me in a massive faux pas)

Have you ever seen a double barrel howitzer that shoots nuclear ordinance? If you did you'd be saying, "Damn, I want one!" too.

Personally, i use mine for hunting rabbits ... gotta kill a lot of those suckers to get a pot full, though.

No!! Leave the poor cute bunnies alone!

 

[Spare_change]

I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to respond anyway ...

What principles define America?

Let's start at the top -

Self Determination.

The whole context of the American experiment is based on the premise that each person should be able to determine his future, and his happiness. Neither the government, nor other citizens, should have ability to interfere with an individual's pursuit of happiness. Onerous, and unnecessary, regulation and control violates that precept.

Self Responsibility

The American experiment is also rooted in the belief that each citizen is not only capable of caring for himself, but has the innate responsibility to do so. Each citizen should be rewarded - good or bad - for the results of his own activity. If he succeeds, he succeeds - but if he fails, he fails. In either case, he must bear the responsibility, and the results, of his own performance. Thomas Jefferson said, "“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Self Control

For the first time in history, the American experiment believed that every citizen is capable of controlling his actions, and as such, should be responsible for the impact of the results of those actions on others. Ronald Reagan said, "“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”

Self Government

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them. The government of the US must be made to be subservient to the citizenry. Someone once said, "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

The whole American experiment hinges on the belief that people are smart enough, strong enough, and good enough to exercise control over their government and their society.

Once you accept these pillars, you will have context to understand the documents that implement these concepts.

Sorry --- you can go back to the childish arguing and mindless pissing contests that masquerade as discussion.

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them.

So you wish to be controlled by the collective wisdom of the people, taking for granted that that wisdom is correct? Is this to childish of a question for you to answer?

BINGO!!! You, and Mr. Gruber, have let the cat out of the bag ... you have demonstrated the inherent bias, the poison, of the liberal left ... that YOU know better .. that YOU are smarter than everybody else ... that the average person is incapable of making these highly complex and profound decisions ... so they should just leave it to the elite class to handle it for them. You don't want citizens ... you want lemmings.

Now, to answer your question ... you DAMN right I believe in the collective wisdom of the American people, versus a small group of disconnected, disaffected, and dishonest elitists who so profoundly believe in their inherent superiority that they dare to even ask such a stupid question.

Oh, by the way, that collective wisdom of the people? I get to participate in it. THAT is what makes it smarter - LOL!

I hope I was clear.

I do have a question, who are these elitists you talk about?

You.

Tell me how. My conversation was with the key guy about occupy wall street. You got in the conversation, muddied the waters with excessive verbiage , so I really need reminding about how I was being elitist/

Simple - your dogged insistence that the government (and, by extension, the liberal left of which you are clearly a card-carrying member) knows best what is good for the people, that it, by virtue of its benevolence, grants us our rights, and its inherent 'responsibility' to take care of the citizenry, your zealous support of the methods to pass Obamacare despite the fact that over 60% of the citizenry didn't want it, your enthusiasm about Obama's abuse of Constitutional authority.

Your elitism is demonstrated by your refusal to acknowledge the wishes of the American people should be what determines the direction of this country, not the positions of a small minority of people.

As for my 'excessive verbiage', I'll be glad to dumb down my comments so you can keep up. (I don't mean that, but I use it as an example of the 'elitism' you portray - put the shoe on the other foot, if you will)

 

[Spare_change]

Our rights are inalienable, they manifest as a consequence of our humanity; they can be neither taken nor bestowed by any government, constitution, or man.

Although inalienable our rights are not absolute, they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government: “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.” (DC v. Heller (2008)). The Constitution and its case law establishes the boundaries government may not cross when seeking to place restrictions on citizens' liberties, while at the same time affords the citizen an understanding as to the limits of his rights in a free and democratic society, where the Constitution both authorizes government to limit one's civil liberties and protects the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances, seeking relief in the Federal courts.

It is this constant struggle, therefore, between government and governed – government always probing the Constitutional edifice for weaknesses to exploit, and citizens opposing government overreach in the neutral venue of the courts – that a free, just, and viable society is maintained.

This is such nonsense... Rights are not absolute and this is without regard to government whimsy.

I am entitled to do whatever the hell I feel is necessary to fulfill my life, as along as my exercise of that rightful behavior does not infringe upon the means of another to exercise their own rights.

If I need a double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads, and bolted onto a supersonic fighter jet, then I am entitled, on no less an authority then the Creator of the Universe to possess such... but I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO SUCH AT THE EXPENSE OF SO MUCH AS A SINGLE INNOCENT LIFE...

Just as I am entitled to have sexual intercourse with anyone I can talk into it, as long as I am prepared to bear the responsibilities that come as a consequence of engaging in the behavior which nature designed SPECIFICALLY for PROCREATION, thus where a child is conceived, my RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN COITUS RESTS ENTIRELY UPON MY BEARING THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SUSTAIN THE LIFE I CONCEIVED.

I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO ENGAGE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND TO DESTROY THE LIFE THAT I CONCEIVED BECAUSE SUCH IS AN INCONVENIENCE!

See how that works?

I do not get my rights from the Government, thus I do not consult the government in the exercising of my rights... in no way and on no level.

My rights are not negotiable, I will not compromise on the exercising of them and I will not tolerate another exercising their would-be right at the expense of my means to exercise my own.

Because I am an American and that... is how we roll.

What convoluted, tortured logic .... clearly, you don't even understand what your rights are, nor do you understand the social contract inherent in those rights.

Rights are absolute ... until you grasp that, you'll never understand. "double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads" is not a right ... but, I'll leave you to figure that out.

(Look out, folks, here's where they trot out the "but you believe in the Second Amendment" rights BS - hoping to catch me in a massive faux pas)

Have you ever seen a double barrel howitzer that shoots nuclear ordinance? If you did you'd be saying, "Damn, I want one!" too.

Personally, i use mine for hunting rabbits ... gotta kill a lot of those suckers to get a pot full, though.

No!! Leave the poor cute bunnies alone!

You're right .... bunnies are good .... sauteed on each side for about 3 minutes, and served with mashed potatoes, gravy, and corn.

 

[ChrisL]

This is such nonsense... Rights are not absolute and this is without regard to government whimsy.

I am entitled to do whatever the hell I feel is necessary to fulfill my life, as along as my exercise of that rightful behavior does not infringe upon the means of another to exercise their own rights.

If I need a double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads, and bolted onto a supersonic fighter jet, then I am entitled, on no less an authority then the Creator of the Universe to possess such... but I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO SUCH AT THE EXPENSE OF SO MUCH AS A SINGLE INNOCENT LIFE...

Just as I am entitled to have sexual intercourse with anyone I can talk into it, as long as I am prepared to bear the responsibilities that come as a consequence of engaging in the behavior which nature designed SPECIFICALLY for PROCREATION, thus where a child is conceived, my RIGHT TO ENGAGE IN COITUS RESTS ENTIRELY UPON MY BEARING THE RESPONSIBILITY TO SUSTAIN THE LIFE I CONCEIVED.

I am NOT ENTITLED TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO ENGAGE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND TO DESTROY THE LIFE THAT I CONCEIVED BECAUSE SUCH IS AN INCONVENIENCE!

See how that works?

I do not get my rights from the Government, thus I do not consult the government in the exercising of my rights... in no way and on no level.

My rights are not negotiable, I will not compromise on the exercising of them and I will not tolerate another exercising their would-be right at the expense of my means to exercise my own.

Because I am an American and that... is how we roll.

What convoluted, tortured logic .... clearly, you don't even understand what your rights are, nor do you understand the social contract inherent in those rights.

Rights are absolute ... until you grasp that, you'll never understand. "double barrel howitzer, loaded with thermo-nuclear warheads" is not a right ... but, I'll leave you to figure that out.

(Look out, folks, here's where they trot out the "but you believe in the Second Amendment" rights BS - hoping to catch me in a massive faux pas)

Have you ever seen a double barrel howitzer that shoots nuclear ordinance? If you did you'd be saying, "Damn, I want one!" too.

Personally, i use mine for hunting rabbits ... gotta kill a lot of those suckers to get a pot full, though.

No!! Leave the poor cute bunnies alone!

You're right .... bunnies are good .... sauteed on each side for about 3 minutes, and served with mashed potatoes, gravy, and corn.

Don't mess with the bunnies. They take kindly to people trying to eat them!

 

[bripat9643]

the point is that rights are given by governments. we have a right to free speech. not everyone country has that. freedom of religion/press/assembly? that's not universal. right to bear arms? nope. equal protection? please.

so what's the problem again?

Nope. The founding Fathers said it, our rights are given by God. Whether or not libtards socialists say otherwise makes no difference.

Only the rights that you like of course.

Remember how outraged republicans were at the occupy wall street protesters for trying to exercise their free speech? Same with the right wing hatred of the protesters during the Vietnam war.

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

Only the rights that you like of course.

Remember how outraged republicans were at the occupy wall street protesters for trying to exercise their free speech? Same with the right wing hatred of the protesters during the Vietnam war.

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

What are the principles that define America and how should I adhere to them?

You can't be serious?

May I ask what country you were born to and which you are a citizen of?

So you can't explain what the principles are that define america, so you change the subject.

Liberty is the principle that defines America.

 

[dcraelin]

Remember how outraged republicans were at the occupy wall street protesters for trying to exercise their free speech? Same with the right wing hatred of the protesters during the Vietnam war.

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

What are the principles that define America and how should I adhere to them?

You can't be serious?

May I ask what country you were born to and which you are a citizen of?

So you can't explain what the principles are that define america, so you change the subject.

I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to respond anyway ...

What principles define America?

Let's start at the top -

Self Determination.

The whole context of the American experiment is based on the premise that each person should be able to determine his future, and his happiness. Neither the government, nor other citizens, should have ability to interfere with an individual's pursuit of happiness. Onerous, and unnecessary, regulation and control violates that precept.

Self Responsibility

The American experiment is also rooted in the belief that each citizen is not only capable of caring for himself, but has the innate responsibility to do so. Each citizen should be rewarded - good or bad - for the results of his own activity. If he succeeds, he succeeds - but if he fails, he fails. In either case, he must bear the responsibility, and the results, of his own performance. Thomas Jefferson said, "“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Self Control

For the first time in history, the American experiment believed that every citizen is capable of controlling his actions, and as such, should be responsible for the impact of the results of those actions on others. Ronald Reagan said, "“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”

Self Government

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them. The government of the US must be made to be subservient to the citizenry. Someone once said, "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

The whole American experiment hinges on the belief that people are smart enough, strong enough, and good enough to exercise control over their government and their society.

Once you accept these pillars, you will have context to understand the documents that implement these concepts.

Sorry --- you can go back to the childish arguing and mindless pissing contests that masquerade as discussion.

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them.

So you wish to be controlled by the collective wisdom of the people, taking for granted that that wisdom is correct? Is this to childish of a question for you to answer?

BINGO!!! You, and Mr. Gruber, have let the cat out of the bag ... you have demonstrated the inherent bias, the poison, of the liberal left ... that YOU know better .. that YOU are smarter than everybody else ... that the average person is incapable of making these highly complex and profound decisions ... so they should just leave it to the elite class to handle it for them. You don't want citizens ... you want lemmings.

Now, to answer your question ... you DAMN right I believe in the collective wisdom of the American people, versus a small group of disconnected, disaffected, and dishonest elitists who so profoundly believe in their inherent superiority that they dare to even ask such a stupid question.

Oh, by the way, that collective wisdom of the people? I get to participate in it. THAT is what makes it smarter - LOL!

I hope I was clear.

Remember how outraged republicans were at the occupy wall street protesters for trying to exercise their free speech? Same with the right wing hatred of the protesters during the Vietnam war.

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

What are the principles that define America and how should I adhere to them?

You can't be serious?

May I ask what country you were born to and which you are a citizen of?

So you can't explain what the principles are that define america, so you change the subject.

I know you didn't ask me, but I'd like to respond anyway ...

What principles define America?

Let's start at the top -

Self Determination.

The whole context of the American experiment is based on the premise that each person should be able to determine his future, and his happiness. Neither the government, nor other citizens, should have ability to interfere with an individual's pursuit of happiness. Onerous, and unnecessary, regulation and control violates that precept.

Self Responsibility

The American experiment is also rooted in the belief that each citizen is not only capable of caring for himself, but has the innate responsibility to do so. Each citizen should be rewarded - good or bad - for the results of his own activity. If he succeeds, he succeeds - but if he fails, he fails. In either case, he must bear the responsibility, and the results, of his own performance. Thomas Jefferson said, "“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”

Self Control

For the first time in history, the American experiment believed that every citizen is capable of controlling his actions, and as such, should be responsible for the impact of the results of those actions on others. Ronald Reagan said, "“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.”

Self Government

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them. The government of the US must be made to be subservient to the citizenry. Someone once said, "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

The whole American experiment hinges on the belief that people are smart enough, strong enough, and good enough to exercise control over their government and their society.

Once you accept these pillars, you will have context to understand the documents that implement these concepts.

Sorry --- you can go back to the childish arguing and mindless pissing contests that masquerade as discussion.

The American experience demonstrates that the collective wisdom of the people far exceeds the capability of a select few, and that the citizenry must control those who wish to impose upon them.

So you wish to be controlled by the collective wisdom of the people, taking for granted that that wisdom is correct? Is this to childish of a question for you to answer?

BINGO!!! You, and Mr. Gruber, have let the cat out of the bag ... you have demonstrated the inherent bias, the poison, of the liberal left ... that YOU know better .. that YOU are smarter than everybody else ... that the average person is incapable of making these highly complex and profound decisions ... so they should just leave it to the elite class to handle it for them. You don't want citizens ... you want lemmings.

Now, to answer your question ... you DAMN right I believe in the collective wisdom of the American people, versus a small group of disconnected, disaffected, and dishonest elitists who so profoundly believe in their inherent superiority that they dare to even ask such a stupid question.

Oh, by the way, that collective wisdom of the people? I get to participate in it. THAT is what makes it smarter - LOL!

I hope I was clear.

If you believe in the collective wisdom of the people, then you should not be afraid of what they come up with for rights within a majority rules system.

 

[Kosh]

And yet this thread is perfect example of how the far left does not understand what a "right" is..

 

[Roadrunner]

Nope. The founding Fathers said it, our rights are given by God. Whether or not libtards socialists say otherwise makes no difference.

Only the rights that you like of course.

Remember how outraged republicans were at the occupy wall street protesters for trying to exercise their free speech? Same with the right wing hatred of the protesters during the Vietnam war.

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

Remember how outraged republicans were at the occupy wall street protesters for trying to exercise their free speech? Same with the right wing hatred of the protesters during the Vietnam war.

LOL! The Non-Occupying Occupiers were never seen as 'trying to exercise their free speech'. They were seen as, because they WERE: Trying to become the anti-Tea-Party, to cow supporter of the Tea-Party, to do what the Left is designed to do... to destroy property, intimidate toward the acquisition of political power.

"You'll know them by their fruit...". What did the Non-Occupying Occupiers produce? Disorder, Trash, Dysentery and an epidemic of a RAGING CASE OF THE CLAP!

Compare that to the Tea Party... what have they produced? They cleaned up every place they every went, they shut down the Left's rise to power, reversed their Executive and Legislative Majorities throughout US and State Governance and we've returned the nation toward the recognition and defense of, respect for and the adherence to the principles that define America. First cleaning our own house... of progressive insurgents and we're no where CLOSE to finished there... while simultaneously cleaning out the reprobates of the Left.

Quite a distinction... and you can rest assured: THAT is change you can belieb in... .

What are the principles that define America and how should I adhere to them?

You can't be serious?

May I ask what country you were born to and which you are a citizen of?

So you can't explain what the principles are that define america, so you change the subject.

Liberty is the principle that defines America.

Public assistance to the lazy is the principle that defines America now.