The ACLU Is Anything But American

[mudwhistle]

The fear is this.....just how far will the radical left go.

good question

let me think about it

Even tho mudwhistle admits his right to worship as he sees fit has not been taken away.

They're trying hard to though. Just give them time.
They've already started floating re-writing the constitution, but that's a few years off.

 

[manifold]

good question

let me think about it

Even tho mudwhistle admits his right to worship as he sees fit has not been taken away.

They're trying hard to though. Just give them time.
They've already started floating re-writing the constitution, but that's a few years off.

We've been re-writing it since it was originally ratified. Re-writing it is the only true way to combat the inevitable interpretation drift that occurs by way of precedent setting SCOTUS rulings. Rest assured that you'll get your vote too. I view adding some specificity to parts of the language as just as much an opportunity as I do a threat.

 

[Avatar9]

So you can't cite where Del said any such thing?

no, he can't.

i'll have a good chuckle over it with the others on the leadership board of my church next time we meet though.

Chuckle over this. http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...-is-anything-but-american-19.html#post4070471

Post #275

Good thing there a record to keep liars honest.

Yep.

seeing a cross or the Ten Commandments in a public place

=/=

posting the Ten Commandments in a courthouse

See, a public place could be a storefront or a cross by the side of the road where someone died in a crash. A courthouse is a physical manifestation of the legal arm and authority of the government.

Public place and government are two different matters.

Good thing there's a record so that, when you lie, people can see the facts about what was said for themselves.

 

[mudwhistle]

Even tho mudwhistle admits his right to worship as he sees fit has not been taken away.

They're trying hard to though. Just give them time.
They've already started floating re-writing the constitution, but that's a few years off.

We've been re-writing it since it was originally ratified. Re-writing it is the only true way to combat the inevitable interpretation drift that occurs by way of precedent setting SCOTUS rulings. Rest assured that you'll get your vote too. I view adding some specificity to parts of the language as just as much an opportunity as I do a threat.

I should have said scrap the old one and start from scratch.

 

[Ravi]

They're trying hard to though. Just give them time.
They've already started floating re-writing the constitution, but that's a few years off.

We've been re-writing it since it was originally ratified. Re-writing it is the only true way to combat the inevitable interpretation drift that occurs by way of precedent setting SCOTUS rulings. Rest assured that you'll get your vote too. I view adding some specificity to parts of the language as just as much an opportunity as I do a threat.

I should have said scrap the old one and start from scratch.

Do you have a link to this or is this just some other "fact" you stumbled upon over at Conservapedia or Answers.Com?

 

[mudwhistle]

no, he can't.

i'll have a good chuckle over it with the others on the leadership board of my church next time we meet though.

Chuckle over this. http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...-is-anything-but-american-19.html#post4070471

Post #275

Good thing there a record to keep liars honest.

Yep.

seeing a cross or the Ten Commandments in a public place

=/=

posting the Ten Commandments in a courthouse

See, a public place could be a storefront or a cross by the side of the road where someone died in a crash. A courthouse is a physical manifestation of the legal arm and authority of the government.

Public place and government are two different matters.

Good thing there's a record so that, when you lie, people can see the facts about what was said for themselves.

Of course you omitted the whole purpose of the quote.

Records are facts and can cut both ways.

Del said he never said posting religious symbols is the same as shoving religion down our throats, but post #275 proves otherwise.

He didn't type the words but he did say it was so which is the same thing.

Lie about it if you feel you must.

Btw, if your so into pumping his rod make sure you cradle his nuts so he can get the full effect.

 

[Avatar9]

Del said he never said posting religious symbols is the same as shoving religion down our throats, but post #275 proves otherwise.

Wrong again.

posting religious symbols =/= government sponsorship or support

public space =/= courthouse

He didn't type the words but he did say it was so which is the same thing

No, he didn't. Why do you insist on repeating your lies when everyone here sees them for what they are and knows you're a liar?

Lie about it if you feel you must.

The words are right there, genius.

As for your last comment, you can keep your homosexual fantasies to yourself.

 

[bodecea]

good question

let me think about it

Even tho mudwhistle admits his right to worship as he sees fit has not been taken away.

They're trying hard to though. Just give them time.
They've already started floating re-writing the constitution, but that's a few years off.

Who is "They"?

 

[mudwhistle]

Del said he never said posting religious symbols is the same as shoving religion down our throats, but post #275 proves otherwise.

Wrong again.

posting religious symbols =/= government sponsorship or support

public space =/= courthouse

He didn't type the words but he did say it was so which is the same thing

No, he didn't. Why do you insist on repeating your lies when everyone here sees them for what they are and knows you're a liar?

Lie about it if you feel you must.

The words are right there, genius.

As for your last comment, you can keep your homosexual fantasies to yourself.

Yes they are. Courthouses are public places meaning they are open to the public. They are not private property.

You're trying to dodge the issue like he is. Both of you know what I meant. Which means both of you are lying.

 

[mudwhistle]

What public land isn't owned by government?????

 

[manifold]

They're trying hard to though. Just give them time.
They've already started floating re-writing the constitution, but that's a few years off.

We've been re-writing it since it was originally ratified. Re-writing it is the only true way to combat the inevitable interpretation drift that occurs by way of precedent setting SCOTUS rulings. Rest assured that you'll get your vote too. I view adding some specificity to parts of the language as just as much an opportunity as I do a threat.

I should have said scrap the old one and start from scratch.

I'm not sure that distinction makes a material difference since presumably, the existing one wouldn't be scrapped until the new one gets ratified, and the ratification hurdle is at least as high as the amendment hurdle. Or it could simply be a series of new amendments that supercede existing language, similar to how the the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment.

 

[manifold]

What public land isn't owned by government?????

None.

But in modern parlance 'public land' is not synonymous with 'in public'.

Either an honest misunderstanding going on here or deliberate douchery on the part of one or both of you.

Either way, carry on.

 

[mudwhistle]

What public land isn't owned by government?????

None.

But in modern parlance 'public land' is not synonymous with 'in public'.

Either an honest misunderstanding going on here or deliberate douchery on the part of one or both of you.

Either way, carry on.

My meaning was the same.

He was trying to take a step back from his previous statement.

Somebody's trying to gain cover by parsing words.

 

[manifold]

What public land isn't owned by government?????

None.

But in modern parlance 'public land' is not synonymous with 'in public'.

Either an honest misunderstanding going on here or deliberate douchery on the part of one or both of you.

Either way, carry on.

My meaning was the same.

He was trying to take a step back from his previous statement.

Somebody's trying to gain cover by parsing words.

I don't really care about who's being intentionally obtuse.

But you do understand that you can be standing on privately owned property but still be considered 'in public', like at a restaurant for instance? Right?

 

[mudwhistle]

We've been re-writing it since it was originally ratified. Re-writing it is the only true way to combat the inevitable interpretation drift that occurs by way of precedent setting SCOTUS rulings. Rest assured that you'll get your vote too. I view adding some specificity to parts of the language as just as much an opportunity as I do a threat.

I should have said scrap the old one and start from scratch.

I'm not sure that distinction makes a material difference since presumably, the existing one wouldn't be scrapped until the new one gets ratified, and the ratification hurdle is at least as high as the amendment hurdle. Or it could simply be a series of new amendments that supercede existing language, similar to how the the 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment.

I forget the guy's name.

I'll look it up when I get home, but he alluded to this as a good way to change our outdated constitution:

Iceland taps Facebook to rewrite its constitution | ZDNet

 

[mudwhistle]

None.

But in modern parlance 'public land' is not synonymous with 'in public'.

Either an honest misunderstanding going on here or deliberate douchery on the part of one or both of you.

Either way, carry on.

My meaning was the same.

He was trying to take a step back from his previous statement.

Somebody's trying to gain cover by parsing words.

I don't really care about who's being intentionally obtuse.

But you do understand that you can be standing on privately owned property but still be considered 'in public', like at a restaurant for instance? Right?

The discussion wasn't at the time just about being in public but being in a courthouse.

I don't recall anyone trying to take down the Ten Commandments from a wall at Mc'Donalds.

Getting a lib to admit he's wrong is like trying to nail down Jello.

 

[mudwhistle]

Nobody knows what del was thinking because he didn't elaborate.

My suggestion is that anyone trying to carry his water for him in hopes he may throw some rep their way....mind your own fucken business.

 

[Ravi]

Nobody knows what del was thinking because he didn't elaborate.

My suggestion is that anyone trying to carry his water for him in hopes he may throw some rep their way....mind your own fucken business.

It's clear to most of us that Del made you look like a fool. Okay, he didn't make you look like one, only you can do that. And you do it so often.

And how funny that you want people to mind their own business while here you are lying about all kinds of things to push your stupid business down our throats.

 

[bodecea]

My meaning was the same.

He was trying to take a step back from his previous statement.

Somebody's trying to gain cover by parsing words.

I don't really care about who's being intentionally obtuse.

But you do understand that you can be standing on privately owned property but still be considered 'in public', like at a restaurant for instance? Right?

The discussion wasn't at the time about being in public but being in a courthouse.

I don't recall anyone trying to take down the Ten Commandments from a wall at Mc'Donalds.

Getting a lib to admit he's wrong is like trying to nail down Jello.

 

[Harry Dresden]

How's that car repair going at the appliance shop? Most of us know to go to the experts in their field instead of showing up somewhere else and whining about how come they don't do what the other guy already does so well.

you know what Bo......your no different then posters like TM and Dean,Rabbi....wont address a question put to you that you either dont want to answer or cant.....but hey.....keep dancing around things Bo.....your in the "lets dance league" now......what an honor......

You can't grasp that the ACLU is for 1st amendment issues and the NRA is for 2nd amendment issues. You want to hold the ACLU accountable for NOT doing something that there is already a competent group dedicated for (the NRA). It's silly fault finding on your part along the same lines as blaming your appliance repairman for not being willing to fix your car when there is a perfectly good car repairman down the street. You don't like that appliance repairman so you make silly complaints "Look! He's not willing to fix my car! He's bad!"

your the one who said they take on ANYcases involving individual civil rights......then you say they don't in the next sentence......words have meaning Bo.....i know its hard for you to grasp that.....but they do.....its no doubt the reason you would not answer that question i asked you about 5 times here....because you have a hard time understanding what that funny little 3 letter word means......if you don't understand the language,take a night class.....don't worry,there are lots of people your age there,you wont feel to weird.....