Do you run your home economy the way you expect to see the Federal Government run?

Not in the airport they don't.

I have no idea what the rest of your post is rarabling about. I just thought it was interesting that you would analogize adults (who do have all those rights) subject to the United States government with children subject to their parents.

As for me, I would rather compare the government to children. Unfortunately, today they are the equivalent of children who have learned they can get whatever they want if they throw a loud enough tantrum. And that's on the rare occasions they are being supervised at all.
 
Since the founding fathers were immoral, they didn't derive their power from morality

They derived their power from the people who sent them to outline the rights they wanted their nation to afford its citizens

What's hilarious is that most of these "rights are natural" blah blah "I'm against tyranny" blah blah, were the same people who said gay rights, specifically gay marriage were wrong

Yet again showing how flawed their outlook on rights is
 
People grant themselves rights already protected by the Constitution? People grant themselves the "Right to free speech" when they vote every four years even though that right is protected by the First Amendment? People grant themselves the right of freedom of religion when they vote even though it's also protected by the First Amendment???? WTF???
 
oic


Well, a federal guarantee was good enough for mortgage lenders too. And the federal government does have a history of bailing people out whether it can afford to or not. But it's worth pointing out that the federal government wasn't so much in danger of running out of credit two and a half years ago, before the national debt was run up by an additional 40%.
 
My economy is run pretty much the exact way I want the fed run.

I spend far less than I take in and I utilize temporary cheap labor (gf) while not allowing said labor any rights in the decisionmaking process. I make use of responsible borrowing practices (dad) in order to ensure cash flow for emergencies.
 
... unless your religion says you can smoke pot and you do so in the comfort of your own home or in your temple, then they can pretty much all but prevent you from doing so, by regulating the buying and even growing, and it wouldn't harm on anyone elses right.

Or guns, where I can make an "auto sear" or silencer or take a hack saw to a shot gun. Forget even shooting the gun legally after that, just doing THAT will call the FeRAB down upon me, even though we have a Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms.

Etc, etc, etc.

The government IS WAY over their authority on many things these days. Even the "if it doesn't hurt anyone else" rule doesn't apply anymore.
 
I don't know and neither does anyone else... making up a bullshit answer with no evidence is not preferable to admitting that you don't know.

Simply having an answer is not better than not having an answer if the answer is clearly nonsense, I might as well say the answer is magic...

There that is my answer, magic... happy?
 
And there is a recourse for that, ie the court system.

The fact still remains your freedom of speech is not granted by the government, to conclude as such means the government can take it away. The First Amendment clearly states "Congress shall pass no law...." in other worRAB, Congress cannot infringe on a right that you possess.

It should be pointed out, IF what you say is true, our rights are granted by the government, then the last part of your statement would be false. NOONE would have the right to a jury violated, because the government cannot violate what it grants.
 
Oh I agree with you, the government violates the rights of the citizenry all the time. But again, those rights are not granted by the government, they are granted by the Constitution. They are violated by the government.

Congress doesn't grant me the right to arm myself, the Constitution does.
 
Because they were flawed that negates everything that has been said? That negates the premise of what the Constitution recognizes and doesn't recognize? I don't think anyone would argue they were perfect or that they weren't flawed, I just don't see the logic in how that negates what the Constituon protects and who grants rights.
 
I don't have kiRAB, so am I allowed to comment on the financial part?



Also, you would analogize adult citizens as the government's children... why am I not surprised
 
Back
Top