Watch how easy these Liberals sign to Repeal the FIRST amendment

[Uncensored2008]

Is that part of the Bill of Rights?

Is the requirement that one report their finance, living arrangement, marital status, the product of their sex life, all of their investments, where they work and how much they get paid, the Obamunist idea of the "right to privacy?"

Oh, that's right - "Privacy" means abortion, and nothing else.

 

[koshergrl]

I agree, and so is the Fourth Amendment. How did that work out for people who railed against the 16 amendment when they tried to cite the aforementioned Amendments?

You still didn't answer the question.

I think that you need to read better. The poster bought up something that I am pretty sure has been tried before the Supreme court, defeated, and the people prosecuted.

So? Did you answer the question? If so, where?

 

[Pheonixops]

Is that part of the Bill of Rights?

Is the requirement that one report their finance, living arrangement, marital status, the product of their sex life, all of their investments, where they work and how much they get paid, the Obamunist idea of the "right to privacy?"

Oh, that's right - "Privacy" means abortion, and nothing else.

When was the last time a "conservative"Administration (Reagan, etc.), a republican House and Senate, dropped those requirements?

 

[emilynghiem]

Obama Supporters Petition to Repeal the FIRST AMENDMENT. Seriously! Watch! - YouTube

Is this a trick question like a Zen Koan riddle?
Like can God create a universal law but then break it?

Of course, by the First Amendment "freedom of speech, or of the press", you can write and sign away all you want. By religious freedom/free exercise, you cannot impose this on your neighbor. Or you violate the same law you invoke, causing breach of the peace, which disrupts the right of others to assemble peaceably if you incite harassment and rioting!

These are natural laws, regarding free will in terms of free exercise, free speech etc.
All people have them, but the Constitutional laws put them in writing and made them statutory.

by the same natural laws, the rights of human beings inalienable by our human nature universal to everyone on the planet,
if you abuse your freedom to try to threaten to abridge equal rights/protections of others,
they will in turn use the same free speech and exercise rights to assemble and petition for rebuke and redress of grievances in protest of the injustice.

so the natural laws and democratic process will merely continue
until the conflicts are resolved and there is equal justice and protection under the laws.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Counterpoint.

America's Savior Pt. 1 - YouTube

Here's the difference. Most of the people in your video actually READ the thing.
The bottom line is this: this country is chock full of uninformed individuals. Most however, are on the left side of the political spectrum.

 

[theHawk]

Obama Supporters Petition to Repeal the FIRST AMENDMENT. Seriously! Watch! - YouTube

Wow....all of those idiots should have their citizenship stripped.

 

[Pheonixops]

Obama Supporters Petition to Repeal the FIRST AMENDMENT. Seriously! Watch! - YouTube

Wow....all of those idiots should have their citizenship stripped.

Why? Aren't they expressing the First Amendment rights ?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

[emilynghiem]

Now answer the question:

Does the Constitution authorize the IRS to force you to fill out a Form 1040?

No, if you don't believe the IRS is constitutional, this is perfectly valid and people should not be punished for constitutional beliefs; however, in order not to impose an unfair financial burden on others, a different system would have to be agreed upon as an alternative.

Such as only using federal funding as agreed upon uniformly by the public
(this would definitely limit federal govt to jsut the minimum that people agree upon,
and delegate the rest to the States or to the Parties as people choose democratically.)

Any agenda/issues that people/states don't agree on through the federal govt can be relegated and managed through voluntary funding of programs and policies through the Party of one's choice.

There is plenty of room to rework this idea.
if the federal govt is limited to just the parts the public agrees on,
it could be run on sales tax or a flat tax instead of the bureaucratic mess we have now.

And until the govt is out of debt, any payments above the minimum
can be accepts as LOANS invested in govt, where taxpayers have a say
in the terms of where the money will be invested to get the country out of debt
and back on track to rebuilding infrastructure, education jobs and health
services on a sustainable basis. where ppl don't agree yet, and need programs
developed and proven first before funding them, that is where parties could manage that
among their members and leaders and quit imposing unproven agenda on opposing groups.

 

[emilynghiem]

Not to worry, keep abusing your rights and you do end up losing them that way.
I have friends who already act like victims, and depend on either party or govt to feel their rights are protected when this should come directly from enforcing laws, not other people!
so you might as well already be a slave if you are so dependent you cannot act on your own.

Obama Supporters Petition to Repeal the FIRST AMENDMENT. Seriously! Watch! - YouTube

Wow....all of those idiots should have their citizenship stripped.

As long as these protestors don't enforce laws that violate the rights of others, and as long as they pay the costs of their protests and petitions, they are not necessarily imposing.

As for revocation of citizenship, this should be reserved for those who physically abuse rights and freedoms to commit premeditated crimes, against people property or principles, robbing other people of their same rights. if people are not willing to pay the full cost of their actions, such as prison labor to pay costs of restitution to victims and society for rape or murder, they should face the option of exchanging places and giving up citizenship to an applicant on the waiting list to become a law-abiding citizen willing to work and contribute.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Is this a trick question like a Zen Koan riddle?
Like can God create a universal law but then break it?

Of course, by the First Amendment "freedom of speech, or of the press", you can write and sign away all you want. By religious freedom/free exercise, you cannot impose this on your neighbor. Or you violate the same law you invoke, causing breach of the peace, which disrupts the right of others to assemble peaceably if you incite harassment and rioting!

Utterly false and entirely ignorant.

{Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. }

So we look at the amendment, and most of what the left claims becomes instantly clear as falsehood.

First off, where you would seek to prohibit people from displaying or expressing religious views, this is not a provision of the first.

WHO is constrained by the first? Congress - only congress. No constraint is placed on the people. The 14th extends the constraint to the legislature of the many states.

What is CONGRESS constrained from? Making law that establishes a religion. They cannot create the bloody Church of England and require that all taxpayers fund it, attend it, or pay heed to it.

Does this mean congress must prohibit religion? NO, in fact, they are further constrained from prohibiting the free exercise. When leftist thugs smash a creche or haul school children off in chains for singing a Christmas carol, it is that act which violates the first. There is no prohibition of expressing religious views on public ground. The issue is that to the left, the state is god, and they will have no other god before the god of state. Ergo they prohibit the free exercise of religion on what they view as sacred ground - the ground that belongs to the holy state.

 

[theHawk]

Obama Supporters Petition to Repeal the FIRST AMENDMENT. Seriously! Watch! - YouTube

Wow....all of those idiots should have their citizenship stripped.

Why? Aren't they expressing the First Amendment rights ?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I didn't say they should have their rights or freedoms taken away. Just their citizenship to this country.

 

[Oldguy]

I'm a Liberal and I am willing to bet that I favor the Bill of Rights more than most of the "conservatives" who cling to pretty much only 3 of them.

I'll take that bet. Do you think the Constitution authorizes the IRS to make you fill out a form 1040?

That's a dumb question. Of course it does.

AMENDMENT XVI

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.


How that Amendment is implemented is up to Congress to decide and they decided to leave the specifics of how the income tax is collected to the IRS, with Congressional oversight. The IRS created the 1040 and the 1040A and the EZ and every other IRS form in obedience to their Congressional mandate.

It's all Constitutional and done with due process, whether you like it or not.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm a Liberal and I am willing to bet that I favor the Bill of Rights more than most of the "conservatives" who cling to pretty much only 3 of them.

I'll take that bet. Do you think the Constitution authorizes the IRS to make you fill out a form 1040?

That's a dumb question. Of course it does.

AMENDMENT XVI

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.


How that Amendment is implemented is up to Congress to decide and they decided to leave the specifics of how the income tax is collected to the IRS, with Congressional oversight. The IRS created the 1040 and the 1040A and the EZ and every other IRS form in obedience to their Congressional mandate.

It's all Constitutional and done with due process, whether you like it or not.

Wrong. Congress isn't free to implement the 16th Amendment by violating any of the other Amendments or the Constitution. Form 1040 forces you to provide the government with evidence it can use to prosecute you. In other words, it forces you to testify against yourself. It's a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment.

 

[bripat9643]

I agree, and so is the Fourth Amendment. How did that work out for people who railed against the 16 amendment when they tried to cite the aforementioned Amendments?

You still didn't answer the question.

I think that you need to read better. The poster bought up something that I am pretty sure has been tried before the Supreme court, defeated, and the people prosecuted.

Whether the hacks on the supreme court actually enforce the Constitution also isn't being discussed here. They are part of the cabal that has been organized to destroy the Constitution.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That's a dumb question. Of course it does.

AMENDMENT XVI

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

That's a dumb response.

IF there were a right to privacy, then wouldn't one be protected for their person and their papers?

Ah, but "privacy" means "abortion" to you of the left - and NOTHING else.

How that Amendment is implemented is up to Congress to decide and they decided to leave the specifics of how the income tax is collected to the IRS, with Congressional oversight. The IRS created the 1040 and the 1040A and the EZ and every other IRS form in obedience to their Congressional mandate.

So, a person has no right to privacy, nor to be secure in their person and papers, then?

It's all Constitutional and done with due process, whether you like it or not.

You've never actually read the constitution, nor even portions of it, have you?

 

[Oldguy]

I'll take that bet. Do you think the Constitution authorizes the IRS to make you fill out a form 1040?

That's a dumb question. Of course it does.

AMENDMENT XVI

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.


How that Amendment is implemented is up to Congress to decide and they decided to leave the specifics of how the income tax is collected to the IRS, with Congressional oversight. The IRS created the 1040 and the 1040A and the EZ and every other IRS form in obedience to their Congressional mandate.

It's all Constitutional and done with due process, whether you like it or not.

Wrong. Congress isn't free to implement the 16th Amendment by violating any of the other Amendments or the Constitution. Form 1040 forces you to provide the government with evidence it can use to prosecute you. In other words, it forces you to testify against yourself. It's a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment.

Your drivers license can be used to prosecute you too. Do you have to show yours to the cop who stops you for speeding? Is it Constitutional?

 

[Oldguy]

That's a dumb question. Of course it does.

AMENDMENT XVI

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

That's a dumb response.

IF there were a right to privacy, then wouldn't one be protected for their person and their papers?

Ah, but "privacy" means "abortion" to you of the left - and NOTHING else.

How that Amendment is implemented is up to Congress to decide and they decided to leave the specifics of how the income tax is collected to the IRS, with Congressional oversight. The IRS created the 1040 and the 1040A and the EZ and every other IRS form in obedience to their Congressional mandate.

So, a person has no right to privacy, nor to be secure in their person and papers, then?

It's all Constitutional and done with due process, whether you like it or not.

You've never actually read the constitution, nor even portions of it, have you?

You can't just pretend the Constitution says what you want it to say and ignore the rest. We have a whole system of courts, precedents and statutes to define the limits of government power under that Constitution and it has been functioning quite well now for over 200 years.

If you don't like it, move.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Your drivers license can be used to prosecute you too. Do you have to show yours to the cop who stops you for speeding? Is it Constitutional?

In Tejas, It's a Non Arrestable Misdemeanor if you don't.

Non Arrestable.

When the Pig pulls you over and runs your plate, he/she ALREADY knows who the car is registered to and whether the Insurance is up to date. All you have to do (if you want to) is tell the Oinker your name.

But go ahead and tell the Asshole all about your day and where you've been so he/she can fabricate Reasonable Suspicion and/or Probable Cause.

Idiot.

 

[bripat9643]

That's a dumb question. Of course it does.

AMENDMENT XVI

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.


How that Amendment is implemented is up to Congress to decide and they decided to leave the specifics of how the income tax is collected to the IRS, with Congressional oversight. The IRS created the 1040 and the 1040A and the EZ and every other IRS form in obedience to their Congressional mandate.

It's all Constitutional and done with due process, whether you like it or not.

Wrong. Congress isn't free to implement the 16th Amendment by violating any of the other Amendments or the Constitution. Form 1040 forces you to provide the government with evidence it can use to prosecute you. In other words, it forces you to testify against yourself. It's a blatant violation of the 5th Amendment.

Your drivers license can be used to prosecute you too. Do you have to show yours to the cop who stops you for speeding? Is it Constitutional?

Sorry, but there's nothing on your driver's license that a constitutes evidence of a "crime." On the other hand, failure to put evidence of criminal activity on your 1040 constitutes a crime in itself. That's how they nailed Al Capone. He failed to put the profits from his bootlegging operation on his 1040. In other words, he went to prison because he failed to incriminate himself.

 

[bripat9643]

You can't just pretend the Constitution says what you want it to say and ignore the rest.

No, but the Supreme Court can, and that's exactly what it does. In fact, turds like you are onstatnly arguing that the Constitution says whatever the SC says it says.

We have a whole system of courts, precedents and statutes to define the limits of government power under that Constitution and it has been functioning quite well now for over 200 years.

If you don't like it, move.

If "functioning quite well" means it has been functioning to destroy any semblance of the document actually means, then, yes, it has been functioning quite well.