holy crap! look at this! they are marching on the capitol!!

[sgreger1]

He's just been in the news lately coming to NY.

Will beging to discuss the subject to annoy you starting....

now


So when he comes this time is he going to call us satan and talk about how terrible a country we are and we should be more like Iran, the model for freedom and prosperity in the world today?

:wink:

[tom502]

Ha!

I find it interesting, but he says stuff that is so hot button, and it's real un PC to discuss it even. The media loves it though.

[VBSnus]

He's just been in the news lately coming to NY.

Will beging to discuss the subject to annoy you starting....

now


So when he comes this time is he going to call us satan and talk about how terrible a country we are and we should be more like Iran, the model for freedom and prosperity in the world today?

:wink:

IRAN HAS NO GAY PEOPLE. AHMADUDEDIGGER SAYS SO!

[sgreger1]

IRAN HAS NO GAY PEOPLE. AHMADUDEDIGGER SAYS SO!

Lol. I find this odd actually. There is an extremely high amount of gay activity in the middle east, many going by the slogan that "woman are for procreation, men are for pleasure" and yet according to their religion it is so taboo to be gay, and is publicly shunned. Its just weird.


Its like christians who vote republican even though Jesus would have undoubtably been a liberal in todays terms.

[VBSnus]

IRAN HAS NO GAY PEOPLE. AHMADUDEDIGGER SAYS SO!

Lol. I find this odd actually. There is an extremely high amount of gay activity in the middle east, many going by the slogan that "woman are for procreation, men are for pleasure" and yet according to their religion it is so taboo to be gay, and is publicly shunned. Its just weird.


Its like christians who vote republican even though Jesus would have undoubtably been a liberal in todays terms.

My fundamental Christian grandmother-in-law had a talk with my SEVEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER yesterday and told her that she can be friends with "black folk" but never be in a relationship with them. She told her to stick with her own kind because black men always beat women. Then they went to church.

Needless to say, the kids won't be visiting grandma for a time.

[sgreger1]

My fundamental Christian grandmother-in-law had a talk with my SEVEN YEAR OLD DAUGHTER yesterday and told her that she can be friends with "black folk" but never be in a relationship with them. She told her to stick with her own kind because black men always beat women. Then they went to church.

Needless to say, the kids won't be visiting grandma for a time.

:!: :!: :!: Did you remind Grandmother to shut her ****ing mouth and keep that shit to herself?


If any of my family members said that to my daughter and she reported back to me talking about "black folk" and beating and whatenot I would literally disown her.


I can't see the pics cause i'm at work but i'm sure they are hilarious.

[paulwall9]

That really is horrible! But you know what it is typical1 I am puerto-rican and my grand parents still don't like Black people I think it is just there generation everyone stuck to there own Race I guess! But i just let them say whatever they will be by-gone soon so it really doesnt hurt to much as long as you let yours kids know to disregard any thing that granny says!

[sgreger1]

That really is horrible! But you know what it is typical1 I am puerto-rican and my grand parents still don't like Black people I think it is just there generation everyone stuck to there own Race I guess! But i just let them say whatever they will be by-gone soon so it really doesnt hurt to much as long as you let yours kids know to disregard any thing that granny says!

Yah i'm half puerto rican, they definately don't like black people lol. Funny because some puerto rican's are hella dark. Perhaps it is not skin color alone that creates racism, but how a certain group acts?

[Slydel]

Where did you get the idea that we live in a democracy? There is no "vote of the populous". This is a Republic, we elect people into office who we want to represent us. That's the way it is spelled out in the Constitution, and it exists to ensure mob rule does not take over the governing of our nation.

The Constitution gives our Federal government the ability to create executive bureaus and laws, when passed via the Legislative branch and signed into action by the Executive branch. If no case proving it is against the law of the land can be brought before the Supreme Court, it will remain law. These rules are explicitly spelled out in the constitution.

The Declaration of Independence of this nation declares that our government exists to secure our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Constitution exists to define how our government operates in order to further this goal. In the Constitution, the government is given rights to make laws to protect our wellbeing.

As for interpretation, a governing document written over 200 years ago must absolutely be constantly re-interpreted to fit with the way of current times. Of course, I'd never expect someone who says "**** all of you who believe differently because it is not a matter of belief but fact" to understand that things change, nothing is static, and that all things that can be interpreted should be interpreted.

You know what, I need to know something. Where the hell were you people during the 8 years Bush actually was taking away all of our freedoms with the Patriot act, when he was stop-lossing troops for two to three tours, when he was spending like no President had ever spent. Where were you to protest the "government takeover" then? If you're not against Democrats per se, but both parties, where the hell were you when the real atrocities were happening?

Everyone's going nuts over what MIGHT happen right now. We MIGHT give insurance to illegal immigrants, we MIGHT pay more on our electric bill, we MIGHT not get to own automatic assault weapons. Where the hell was the outrage when we WERE losing our rights?

sgreger, I give you a pass since you're such a youngin.

I was wrong on several levels here, the most important being that I used an f-bomb directed towards VBsnus. It was rude and not needed. Sorry VBsnus. I hate when others do the same thing to me. Second, I stated that the U.S. was a democracy, which it is not. I should have said that it is a republic. Third, I was wrong about the populous voting. I was too lazy to investigate it even a little bit. The point I was trying to get across, in very poor fashion, is that congress is only able to pass laws with regards to those items that are specifically allowed in the Constitution. This is where VBSnus and I differ. If it is not allowed in the Constitution or the Amendments, it is not (should not be) allowed. On the other hand, if congress wants to pass an Amendment giving it more power - say the power to enact a socialized health care plan, it should be done through an Amendment through the states. Interpretation and reinterpretation should not be allowed (but seems to be rampant). If interpretations are allowed, then there is not a reason to have a Constitution that directs what our legislatures can and can not do (what has been and is currently occurring). In summary, legislatures do not have the power to create law where they do not have the right. If they want the right, they need to create an Amendment that is ratified by the majority of the states so they have the power to pass law.