The question early on was whether we were going to be aware, smart Americans governing ourselves, or the mob, governed by the elite. Jeffersonian, Federalist, yadda yadda. The simple like a Czar, or perhaps the fearful would be more accurate. Classicalist ideals
The last blog I wrote dealt with the media, bloggers, pundits, politicians
ParaTed2k: I came back today, actually. yesterday now, I guess. I figure there's a way to do this without wading into the ill-tempered fray, and I'll try to find it, again. re: anger I dunno, I've never swayed someone to my ideology with anger, and the more angry the less chance, really. I argued hard, and as far as I know I never changed one person's mind. Anger is more apt to turn someone away from my argument most of the time, I think. If
People vote against, not for, and making you “against” things is big business. Politicians, bloggers, cable news celebrities, talk radio egotists, all fit together to create a huge machine whose specific purpose is to make y
Done with JU. It's become a couch for this kind of insane bullshit and people who are so ready to explode they can't read what is written before they do. Hopefully Gid someday you will reread my responses and see that I wasn't even disagreeing with you, only stating that what you are suggesting isn't possible with the law the way it is. I won't be around, though, because frankly this kind of insipidness isn't worth my time. Done. Taking your advice Gid, I won't be checking back in.
"I'm sorry, Baker. The inner city gangs are really just social clubs. I see them all the time helping little old ladies across the street, painting old buildings and making their community a better place. They're what make inner city communities highly desirable pieces of real estate." So the rule of law doesn't matter, screw the constitution, and get people you perceive to be a threat any way you can. The "gangs" are a homogeneous unit, and if gang mem
Gids response is what I am talking about when I say that America is in trouble, at least some segments of it. This irrational, brewing anger towards anything and everything that they perceive as a threat, and frankly anyone who differs with them, runs counter to how our society was intended to function. A whole lot of people are swaddling themselves in a flag that doesn't truly represent their beliefs, in my opinion.
"Now, yes, technically if they're convicted of a crime, they can be denied citizenship. Are you really naive enough to believe that conviction rates are high for gang members? They keep their inner city neighborhoods terrorized with fear, so they don't report." Gang presence is as large in prison as it is outside of prison often. Tons and tons of gang members go to jail, Gid, I'm surprised that you'd feel conviction rates for them are low as compared to
"So why are we even CONSIDERING granting them legal status?" I'd find it difficult to believe that there aren't provisions in the bill that don't require the same requirement as regular immigration; namely that if you've committed a crime while you were here you aren't eligible. Unless you want to declare these gangs terrorist groups (good luck), and can then prove membership in them (again, good luck), I think we're dealing with each person on their ow
"From the very beginning Christians have always had the 7 Sacraments receiving them from the Apostles who received them from Christ. When Christ ascended into heaven He left His Church to be a channel of grace to men. The fruits of His death had to be applied to souls. The Church performs the outward signs of the Sacrament but has no power whatsoever with the Sacraments’ power of giving grace." But in the end you rely on the concious decision of those me
Make it difficult for law abiding citizens to own guns, only the criminals will have guns. Make legal immigration prohibitively difficult and costly, immigration becomes a criminal enterprise more often than not. Conservatives understand the former, but in years of online discussion I can never seem to make them understand the latter. The fact is, we aren't honest. We don't want people coming here for the most part. That's why we make it costly (in the thousands of dollars) and hide
"At any rate, I believe marriage is a matter between participants and that government should butt out" Government at some level has to regulate marriage, even in a libertarian ideal situation without government benefits, etc. There has to be some means of stopping men who keep more than one household behind their wives' backs, settling divorces, child support, etc., right? While not necessarily licensed, marriage has been regulated, or at least
"nice twist and spin. that was an example of where the courts defended minority rights." You sure? What you said was: "the law pre 67 was such that people thought that it was a "choice" to love a person of another race...and they disapproved of that choice." Seemed like you were saying that they thought it was a choice and that it wasn't. Sorry if it seemed like I was twisted something, it seemed twisted the w
}up until 1967, it was illegal in many states for an interracial couple to marry. states like alabama refused to change their state constitution until the year 2000. opponents of interracial marriage damned it as "unnatural." the law pre 67 was such that people thought that it was a "choice" to love a person of another race...and they disapproved of that choice. but in the end, reason won out over hatred and bigotry...eve nwhen it was masked in laws that appeared to pr
It's really not difficult to test this and I don't know why it hasn't been tested. You can find out if a man could get off on sex with a man just by subjecting them to the porn test. If they get an erection from watching gay porn, they're gay or bisexual. If not, they're not. If they get an erection from watching straight porn, they're probably into women (this is difficult to prove cos straight porn by definition involves a man...)." Come on. Somehow me
"just the fact that you consider homosexuality a "morality" is why we can't talk about this. it has nothing to do with morality. being gay is not a choice. and the only people who do think it's a choice are quite frankly, morons on this issue." Prove it. You're playing the rational head here. It doesn't matter if someone points out 100 people who shifted to heterosexuality after being "gay" during their lives, it is just assumed they weren't gay to beg
SanChonino beat me to it. Given the topic, and the fact I've never had it at all, I was just wondering... up to where? Normally you point to their neck when you say that, but I'm thinking that isn't physically possible... well, wait...
Meh, pointless. To sum up for the last time, there is nothing but horror when someone refers to an illegal alien who has lived and worked here for years as an "American". Yet, you can see it right here, if you question taking that status away from, say, a child murderer, again, more indignation for being the "thought police". In the end it is the WASP country club mentality, that god forbid we let the unwashed in to rub elbows with our members. Members who are often ignorant non-cont
"I see you chose to rather call me ignorant as oppose to answering my question. I asked specifically about those who can't not those who can but chose not to." I was responding to you saying: "The odds of someone being born and raised here no knowing the language would be a first for me." As for stripping the citizenship of retarded kids, I chose to overlook an idiotic question. If you'd take the time to read you'd realize I'm not promoting stripping a
I'm not aware of the term "in(un)alienable rights" being in the constitution, Gid. As for the declaration, those rights include "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Feel free to set those down in some legally defined form for me. No doubt some people consider gay marriage to fit in there with "happiness", too, and yet you don't consider it a right. "The truth is, there are some rights our founding fathers DID feel were inviolable and inalienable.
"none of our allies in europe have any ban on open homosexual people in the military. assuming all military are against it is false." Assuming there isn't military bias against it, even in nations that allow it, is irresponsible. But, then, so is using a man from 200 years ago as a hand puppet to promote one's own morality...
"ladies and gentleman,,,put your hands together for the thought police! And a round of applause for people whose knee-jerk bias prevents them from even grasping the simplest of points. You read what you want to believe. I am not advocating the stripping of citizenship. Asking why people don't do something isn't necessarily demanding they do it. ...but, then I am growing to expect people around here to only be able to digest a thumbnail sketch
"The problem is, Baker, WHERE DO WE SEND THEM? Who would take them? We don't necessarily want to endure them, but we HAVE to because we can't just set them adrift on a board in the middle of the ocean." Where do we send the ones we strip of citizenship for other crimes? What if no one wants them, either? Didn't seem to be a big enough problem to keep us from passing such laws for other crimes, did it? "Do you really
"The fact is, though, as Dr. Guy says, we can only do so much about our citizens who violate these rules. They were born here, after all, and we can't simply kick them out." On the contrary, Gid, we can do anything we want, it's a democracy. We already passed legislation allowing us to strip people of citizenship and deport them if they are found to be supporting terror. Not killing people, mind you, but even fundraising. I find it difficult t
P.S. And before someone reminds me, I am well aware that illegal immigrants commit crimes here, too. As a long time fan of the NRA, though, I have to wonder. When you make legally owning a gun harder and harder, the average person who acquires a gun will be someone who doesn't mind getting it illegally. That's the old saw: when guns are illegal, only criminals will have guns. The same thing works for immigration. The more difficult you make it, the more you discourage leg
JoeUser Forums