FORUM RULES UPDATED - - -
The forum rules have been updated to continue to provide a friendly and safe environment for our member community. Please take a moment to review the updated rules and our terms of use and privacy policy. Click here for . . . Forum RulesYou are right.You have a constitutional right to bear arms and I do not want that to be changed.Abortion is also a constitutional right and you want that to be changed.Either the constitution is beyond reproach or it is not. You cannot have it both ways.
But just to put things in perspective.George Washington was a slave owner and he did not think that slave ownership was wrong.If your reaction to that is, "Yes but times and morals change" you might find yourself on thin ground concerning your right to bear arms
......You have a constitutional right to bear arms and I do not want that to be changed.Abortion is also a constitutional right and you want that to be changed.Either the constitution is beyond reproach or it is not. You cannot have it both ways.
But just to put things in perspective.George Washington was a slave owner and he did not think that slave ownership was wrong.If your reaction to that is, "Yes but times and morals change" you might find yourself on thin ground concerning your right to bear arms
Where did that come from? You keep your liver role right where it is....BTW, Rubberfroggie/OMR, you call me a liberal?
I gotchor librohl riiiiiightt here.....
Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling, and empty building.
My point is I will be carry this weapon legal or not, if need to be I will let the lawyers sort thru the details.
You are right.You have a constitutional right to bear arms and I do not want that to be changed.
You are right here Rolmops, it is a "Constitutional right" directly from the big fella: "self evident" to all but those without brains.
Abortion is also a constitutional right and you want that to be changed.
Wrong here Rolmops, the Constitution is only 20 pages long!! I DARE YOU TO FIND THOSE WORDS ANYWHERE IN THE DOCUMENT. This is what FDR taught this great Republic to do, when the Liberals want something as they did in the 1930s, (far more government then the Founding Fathers allowed), and the mid 1970s, (killing the unborn for lifestyle choices), just have some intellectually corrupt jurists make it up from their "living breathing document". It is called "tyranny from the bench", and one of the major reasons voters should never support most modern Democrats.
Either the constitution is beyond reproach or it is not. You cannot have it both ways.
Please read the document before lecturing us.
But just to put things in perspective.George Washington was a slave owner and he did not think that slave ownership was wrong.
Wrong here too, He released all his slaves to freedom at his passing.
If your reaction to that is, "Yes but times and morals change" you might find yourself on thin ground concerning your right to bear arms
Except that......and honestly think about my arguement please.
The liberal is put together a little differently than a conservative and this is a perfect example.
The conservative has been sensible regarding being armed. It's practical not to have fully automatic weapons or armament. That and other compromises are made. The liberal is forever on the march to TAKE more.
On abortion the liberal wants partial-birth, late term, tax payer funded, for minors without parental notification, quick and convenient termination proceedures. And it is they who forever are on the march to become even more obscene about it,without compromise.
The conservative is forced to have their tax money used on abortions where the question of "when does it become a living human?" isn't even in doubt. The right to privacy or choose as allowed then becomes not so private and not so much of a choice, even on religious/moral grounds to a conservative.
So it seems "cannot have it both ways", is worse being that it is more like, the liberals want it all.
On your other perspective;
There were some pretty fair clues that the framer's knew full good and well that slavery was bad.
It was the very Constitution itself that gave moral compass to the abolishionists to force change. The very words in the Constitution were used in arguement to wiegh opinion and change. Witness the evolution of the people to embrace the Constitution, not change it. Subsequent ammendments (13,15) regarding slavery weren't even needed. The words "All men are created equal" make those redundant.
I'd argue that changing (decaying) morals has been the result of liberal interpetation of their "living document". Changing a Constitution in times of decaying morality by those responsible for the decay will result in a substantially worse Constitution.
BTW, Rubberfroggie/OMR, you call me a liberal?
I gotchor librohl riiiiiightt here.....
Hmmmmmm Skinny, You been smokin' Rolmops' n' PW2s' stuff?? Where did ya find their stash?? I want some too!! Please show me where I ever called you a Liberal. You are several notches to the right of me, (from your posts here on iboats), and I don't Cornsider myself to be Liberal on most issues. JR