Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - American conservatives are preparing for an armed revolution

dksuddeth · 04-21-2011, 12:06 PM

what are you missing? it's like will said, it's generally accepted by most people that no right is absolute, but someone tell me what the very first case that was decided that says 'no right is absolute'. Most people refer to Wendell Holmes opinion where he says 'can't yell fire in a crowded theater'. 1919 was the year. This is the forest you're missing. Most people stand by the axiom that the courts are the only ones to interpret the constitution, which of course is completely false, but since it's been 'accepted' by most people, that's just the way it is now. The founders would never have stood for that, which is probably why the government waited so long to start implementing that ideology.

The truth is that we the people wrote the constitution, not the government, therefore we the people are the ones that interpret the constitution. Much like the tyrants that decided Dred v. Scott (wrongly I might add), we the people took corrective action in writing and ratifying the 14th Amendment. It apparently wasn't enough because the courts have implemented their own brand of social engineering through that very amendment.

In the beginning of this nation, it was believed that rights were indeed absolute, whether you choose to believe that is irrelevant because that's just the way it is. nearly every framers writings and all the commentaries of the day point out that fact that congress cannot do certain things, no matter how much they may want to.

Now, in this day and age, i'm sure most people are comfortable with having a group of people that are not answerable to we the people judge what we can and cannot do and call it constitutional. A classic evasion of responsibility, that way if a case comes down that people don't like, like citizens united, then we can simply say that they were wrong, but do nothing about it. it's just plain giving up on our lives and liberties.

most of you all here will not agree with my views, which is sad, but matters very much in the way of things. The government will continue to enforce THEIR wants and desires unless a huge amount of the populace disagrees. It's that way with freedom of speech, right to bear arms, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, and private property rights.

It all comes down to people not agreeing with certain rights, while others don't like the rights of another group. plain political hackery and ideology, as flawed and functional like a square peg in a round hole. Until people come to the conclusion that only they, and they alone, can enforce their rights against any government, we the people will continue to see the eventual removal of our rights as they get replaced with government authorized actions. It's terribly pathetic that most people in this nation desire this.

04-21-2011, 12:06 PM	#301 (permalink)
dksuddeth Junkie Location: bedford, tx	what are you missing? it's like will said, it's generally accepted by most people that no right is absolute, but someone tell me what the very first case that was decided that says 'no right is absolute'. Most people refer to Wendell Holmes opinion where he says 'can't yell fire in a crowded theater'. 1919 was the year. This is the forest you're missing. Most people stand by the axiom that the courts are the only ones to interpret the constitution, which of course is completely false, but since it's been 'accepted' by most people, that's just the way it is now. The founders would never have stood for that, which is probably why the government waited so long to start implementing that ideology. The truth is that we the people wrote the constitution, not the government, therefore we the people are the ones that interpret the constitution. Much like the tyrants that decided Dred v. Scott (wrongly I might add), we the people took corrective action in writing and ratifying the 14th Amendment. It apparently wasn't enough because the courts have implemented their own brand of social engineering through that very amendment. In the beginning of this nation, it was believed that rights were indeed absolute, whether you choose to believe that is irrelevant because that's just the way it is. nearly every framers writings and all the commentaries of the day point out that fact that congress cannot do certain things, no matter how much they may want to. Now, in this day and age, i'm sure most people are comfortable with having a group of people that are not answerable to we the people judge what we can and cannot do and call it constitutional. A classic evasion of responsibility, that way if a case comes down that people don't like, like citizens united, then we can simply say that they were wrong, but do nothing about it. it's just plain giving up on our lives and liberties. most of you all here will not agree with my views, which is sad, but matters very much in the way of things. The government will continue to enforce THEIR wants and desires unless a huge amount of the populace disagrees. It's that way with freedom of speech, right to bear arms, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, and private property rights. It all comes down to people not agreeing with certain rights, while others don't like the rights of another group. plain political hackery and ideology, as flawed and functional like a square peg in a round hole. Until people come to the conclusion that only they, and they alone, can enforce their rights against any government, we the people will continue to see the eventual removal of our rights as they get replaced with government authorized actions. It's terribly pathetic that most people in this nation desire this. __________________ "no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."