U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-26-2013, 11:37 AM
 
Location: CHicago, United States
6,936 posts, read 7,264,648 times
Reputation: 3490

Advertisements

Bill of Rights: Bill of Rights | U.S. Constitution | LII / Legal Information Institute
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-26-2013, 11:45 AM
 
Location: Somewhere in the Southwest...
336 posts, read 386,549 times
Reputation: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Well... that's your first mistake right there. I would never defer to anybody regarding my personal opinions on an issue unless I was acknowledging both my personal ignorance and my personal disinterest at the same time. I only let other people decide for me regarding things about which I do not care.
Well, truth is truth and I believe that his blog on this today is important, so I deferred and linked to it...




Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Think about that for a moment. How can a "state" declare anything?

No... a community of people that supported the declaration prevailed over all the other communities that did not. How they prevailed is beside the point; coercion takes many forms beyond the martial one. But within those states, would you pretend for a second that anything vaguely resembling true unanimity was ever achieved? Of course not. There were debates and arguments and eventually one side won and the others were coerced to go along.

The gift of our system is that we generally settle our arguments without bullets. It is always a bit of a puzzle to me that people pretend they are going to save that system with bullets.
Your interpretation of history is so biased, that your moniker is a joke...

You do realize that the USofA was created by one armed citizen protecting the other from TYRANNY:

Quote:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Quote:
...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
But hey, if you want to roll over and let jack-booted thugs rub your soft underbelly, go right ahead Skippy...

EOT
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,894 posts, read 13,663,365 times
Reputation: 3949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901 View Post
This viewpoint, that these rights come from God, might be useful in a theoretical, theological discussion. But in practice, people need to concentrate more on what actually produces results - and in that sense, all these rights come neither from the government nor from God, but from people's willingness to take up arms and defend their basic rights.
That has certainly been true through most of human history. It remains true in nations like Somalia and North Korea, and among our cousins the chimpanzees. It was certainly the opinion of the Tsarnaeve brothers as they planted their bombs in Boston last week.

But a vast amount of humanity has decided to find alternative ways of defending their basic rights. As a general rule they have proven surprisingly successful, and those societies have created levels of affluence and achievement unequaled by cultures of a less sanguine constitution. Generally, in those communities the persons who would resort precipitously to taking up arms and defending whatever they personally believe to be their rights have a label. They are called criminals. Or sometimes "The Taliban."

The only reason we have invented things like "morals" or "laws" is to hopefully prevent or at least reduce the necessity of taking up arms. But in full understanding of the darker angels of our nature, we have given our governments among their other coercive powers that of deadly force to protect what we have agreed upon is the system we choose. The percieved right of any group to take up arms is countered by the right of the rest of us to defend ourselves as well.

And we will defend ourselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 11:48 AM
 
31,385 posts, read 32,111,440 times
Reputation: 14896
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Almost everything our government "does for us" is by coercion.
Governance by definition is a coercive institution. If you do this, these are the penalties, but that coercion works both upon the people and upon the government.

Quote:
They cannot do what they do unless they take from one to give to another.
Well that is quite true as indirect payments go. I don't own a private jet but the government takes from me so that those private jets can safely navigate the airways. I've never been stupid enough to take a small boat out in heavy seas but the government takes from to have the Coast Guard save you from drowning. And while none of those things benefit me, and I along with the majority of my fellow citizens believe that these are good things for the government to do.

Quote:
Where does the government get the authority to coerce me into paying for my neighbors rent?
Ultimately, from the people who through their elected representative believe that this is an important government function under the General Welfare Clause and the Tax and Spend Clause of the Constitution. Do I really have to explain something this elementary to a grow man?

Quote:
I could go on and on.......
You have for years and you are no further along in your argument than the firs time you brought it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 11:52 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,894 posts, read 13,663,365 times
Reputation: 3949
Quote:
Originally Posted by lycos679 View Post
Not every right is codified into the constitution though. The constitution even sates as much.
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

The government gets power by consent of the people that are governed.
Absolutely. This is why I actually am sympathetic to those Framers and Founders who argued that a "Bill of Rights" was a bad idea, as it implied that the only rights that existed were those explicitly enumerated.

But none of that detracts from the mechanisms they gave us to arbitrate the conflicts of rights that are inherent in the very concept of them. And these mechanisms are messy, and imperfect, and unsatisfying and ultimately among the greatest achievements of the human mind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 11:57 AM
 
16,553 posts, read 11,501,698 times
Reputation: 4230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nonarchist View Post
Doesn't the constitution say that Congress has the power to provide for the entire welfare of every single body?
No! Where did you come up with that Marxist garbage?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 11:59 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,894 posts, read 13,663,365 times
Reputation: 3949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901 View Post
That is an absolute lie.
Well, let's not even pretend for a moment that you have an open mind. So much for your capacity to consider and comprehend an opposing argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901
Let me guess, that's what you learned in the Public Fool System?
Bad guess. I spent 12 years in Catholic Parochial Schools. You might consider my undergrad experience to be "Public School" though. I went to West Point. But grad school was, again, a private institution.

You will have to sort through the list of formal fallacies to find another angle of attack. That one missed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901
This is the historical record:

Read that slowly, until it starts to sink in...
Nothing in the Declaration of Independence contradicts anything I have said. Make an argument or don't. But miming towards foundational documents in the hope that they can magically make an argument that you yourself cannot is really not helpful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 12:04 PM
 
Location: texas
9,137 posts, read 6,757,379 times
Reputation: 2374
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Thoughts?

The Bill of Rights PROTECTS Rights, it does not GRANT them as government NEVER HAD THEM TO GRANT


The bill of rights "affirms" rights of the people...it neither grants nor protects them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in the Southwest...
336 posts, read 386,549 times
Reputation: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Nothing in the Declaration of Independence contradicts anything I have said. Make an argument or don't. But miming towards foundational documents in the hope that they can magically make an argument that you yourself cannot is really not helpful.
I chose not to create a personal argument related to this topic, The Bill of Rights PROTECTS Rights, it does not GRANT them as government NEVER HAD THEM TO GRANT, because I think/believe the waters are FAR too muddied and polluted by ideological fantasies to rely on my own resources, thus I rely on the historical record created by John Locke and the Founding Fathers and the legal system of Natural Law THAT created the USofA.

I know, what a quaint position, right?

When faced with seditious and anti-American ideology, I feel it is best to return to the foundation that provided "We the People" with the ability to form a nation state that secured "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness et al", especially given the reality of presently being subjected to a statist, tyrannical oligarchy:

Democrats: ‘We All Belong to the Government
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-26-2013, 12:12 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,894 posts, read 13,663,365 times
Reputation: 3949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901 View Post
Well, truth is truth and I believe that his blog on this today is important, so I deferred and linked to it...
Well... that's your second mistake; Your unwise choice of people to defer to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901
Your interpretation of history is so biased, that your moniker is a joke...
Any scholar who is does not end up biased is unworthy of the label "scholar." The purpose of study is to discover truth, and if you are not ultimately biased towards that truth your effort has been wasted. My biases are at leased arrived at honestly; they or postjudice, not prejudice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901
You do realize that the USofA was created by one armed citizen protecting the other from TYRANNY:
Nonsense. It was created by a large number of armed citizens who decided among themselves (peacefully you might have noticed) through a process of debate and discussion that it was time sever their ties with the mother country. When they were done deciding that, they created an instrument of coercive force to enforce that decision in the form of the Continental Army. They created a government, even if provisional at the outset, and they granted that government the power to use violence to enforce their will.

One musket was about as useful to the Founders as one musk ox or one millstone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biz901
But hey, if you want to roll over and let jack-booted thugs rub your soft underbelly, go right ahead Skippy...
We don't wear jackboots anymore.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:13 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top