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.
I want to thank the OP for this post. The responses from many clearly demonstrates their willingness to bastardize the English language in order to achieve their goal of THEFT from others, that which they themselves have not earned.
Great thread! Thanks again.
You are welcome.
It is fun being sneaky to expose the mentality that is taking our liberties and how we let them with cries of compassion paid for with a gun to my head.
I sense their desperation. It's almost as if they've never encountered logic, honesty and true history thrown in their collective faces as they squirm while squealing,
The squealing going on here are the irrational arguments made by the nonsensical attempt to paint "promote" and "provide" as being exclusive of each other. Because somehow if I provide food to those who might starve, I'm somehow not "promoting" the general welfare in cuckoo-land.
Too bad you live in a democratic republic, where laws are passed that you might not agree with, but the majority of Americans do agree with, and you have to follow those laws or pay the penalty. You want to break the law, break it, do it openly as a form of protest, and pay the penalty.
Statutory laws, cannot conflict with the rules outlined in the Constitution.
One of the rules the federal government wants to neglect because they want all the power of the states, is the 10th amendment.
I want to go beat the hell out of our education system for this BS!
That is not what those two phrases mean. FFS you are inferring your own meaning! /facepalm
Yes, if you received a public education, you should be offended. Because "promote" and "provide" often go hand in hand. As I've proffered example after example after example in this thread to demonstrate. Funny how none of you rebut those examples.
The fact is, we are a Socialist/Communist Country. The government does not own the property and production of goods, but they don't need to as they figured out how to achieve the same thing through regulations.
I disagree here. But you did correct it in the next paragraph.
In fact they do own those very things, because they have the power to take it away from you at will.
There is no such thing any longer considered private property. The closest thing to private property is, the property the government does not let the public own themselves(government property) We the people have been lowered down to only having access to real estate. Not private property.
Same with a business. I do not own my business, I manage it for the various governments that control it and can take it away at will.
Yes, if you received a public education, you should be offended. Because "promote" and "provide" often go hand in hand. As I've proffered example after example after example in this thread to demonstrate. Funny how none of you rebut those examples.
No... what's funny, or actually NOT funny but rather PATHETIC, is how you completely DISMISS the dictionary definition of the word "promote" from the time the word was written in the US Constitution. This is yet ANOTHER example of how the left intentionally bastardizes the English language to further their demands of collective THEFT.
Yes, if you received a public education, you should be offended. Because "promote" and "provide" often go hand in hand. As I've proffered example after example after example in this thread to demonstrate. Funny how none of you rebut those examples.
/sigh
The fifth amendment is very specific, it specified that under this specific issue, an impoverished person has the right to an attorney and one must be provided for them. If the founders intended for people to be provided food, shelter, etc... at the expense of the government, they would have, like the FIFTH, specified it clearly as they did. They did not, why? Because your position is BS! A lie, a manipulation.
what you did was take the phrase promote justice and then picked out that clause in the 5th, then applied it to the general meaning of EVERYTHING.
You can not do that, it is dishonest, it is not related, it is insulting to anyone who has a damn clue about our history of government.
You are manipulating the issue, you are wrong here as you must insert intent to make your case.
You only prove my previous point about how progressives lie and manipulate words.
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.
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.
