Tolerance

In the past five years, I've been subjected to the "fundamental change" the President promised. I've been extremely tolerant with regard to gay marriage and the decriminalization of recreational use of marijuana. I could care less about these two issues, and as a conservative Republican, these and abortion aren't my greatest concerns. However, the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is, and where I'm overly tolerant to recognize social issues important to others, why are they not as tolerant to my views? If marriage is considered to be a God given right for the gay community, why aren't my God given rights represented by the media? My question is to those who value our Rights to keep and bear arms, do you fully understand why, and are you willing to fight a tyrannical government to preserve our rights? When does the left become tolerant of my views?
I know damn well why the left wants to limit my magazine capacity, or render me helpless.
An armed person is a citizen, an unarmed person is a subject.

"I've been extremely tolerant with regard to gay marriage and the decriminalization of recreational use of marijuana. I could care less about these two issues, and as a conservative Republican, these and abortion aren't my greatest concerns." -- Placementvs.Calibur


Wow!!

News Flash: You're no "conservative Republican," not even close! Sounds 100% DEMOCRAT to me.

But you're PARTLY right (or should I say "left"): You ARE what's WRONG with the Republican Party nowadays. "Republicans" like you should get your card pulled and booted out of the Party. Good riddance to you and your ilk!

And BTW...thanks for aiding, abetting and condoning the moral decline of America we are and have been experiencing. Real Americans -- although they are becoming increasingly fewer in numbers and marginalized nowadays -- appreciate your hard work bringing America low and the global joke it is today, I'm sure.

As for you "willing to fight a tyrannical government," *I* would be willing to fight people like you in Civil War II or Culture War I. I do not AT ALL want to "coexist" with your ilk as you all have been responsible for the sorry "nation" we have today. And now with the shootings in Newtown, CT, more repression seems to be on its way. Just that you support gun ownership (as I do) does not AT ALL make us "comrades for the pro-gun cause." Hardly.

Co-existing with you and yours is not an option...so yes, color me INtolerant, with extreme prejudice.

Placementvs.Calibur said:

In the past five years, I've been subjected to the "fundamental change" the President promised. I've been extremely tolerant with regard to gay marriage and the decriminalization of recreational use of marijuana. I could care less about these two issues, and as a conservative Republican, these and abortion aren't my greatest concerns. However, the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is, and where I'm overly tolerant to recognize social issues important to others, why are they not as tolerant to my views? If marriage is considered to be a God given right for the gay community, why aren't my God given rights represented by the media? My question is to those who value our Rights to keep and bear arms, do you fully understand why, and are you willing to fight a tyrannical government to preserve our rights? When does the left become tolerant of my views?
I know damn well why the left wants to limit my magazine capacity, or render me helpless.
An armed person is a citizen, an unarmed person is a subject.

Click to expand...

This proves my point, as an American I'm able to accept the rulings of the courts and the will of the people with regard to referendums. You, however, live in a world of hate, which is intolerant of this great experiment. I'm fiscally conservative, somewhat socially liberal, but always a Republican, just like the first republican President.

Placementvs.Calibur said:

This proves my point, as an American I'm able to accept the rulings of the courts and the will of the people with regard to referendums. You, however, live in a world of hate, which is intolerant of this great experiment. I'm fiscally conservative, somewhat socially liberal, but always a Republican, just like the first republican President.

Click to expand...

Umm....the first Republican president was not fiscally conservative nor socially liberal. He expanded the power of the federal government tremendously and started the death spiral of the Constitution. He did bring about the end to slavery, but that was not his goal. It was an action he took to accomplish much less altruistic goals.

Pres. Lincoln tackled the most pressing social topic of his time, slavery. He didn't concern himself with drug use, which was common, because the government had yet to intervene. I'm not condoning the current status of the most recent findings of our courts/will of Americans, I'm merely concerned with the erosion of the2nd Amendment. If that wasn't clearly stated in my original post then it is now. Let it be known that we have the right to own what the left wants to ban regardless of what the current Pres wants or what the media portrays.

eye95 said:

Umm....the first Republican president was not fiscally conservative nor socially liberal. He expanded the power of the federal government tremendously and started the death spiral of the Constitution. He did bring about the end to slavery, but that was not his goal. It was an action he took to accomplish much less altruistic goals.

Click to expand...

+1000

Yes, Lincoln's most pressing concern in 1861 -- especially after the shooting started -- was Preserving the Union. That slaves were freed along the way was merely coincidental and almost an afterthought.

Additionally, Lincoln knew MOST whites had ZERO interest in living with blacks, and a plan to send them all back to Africa (Liberia?) was deemed too expensive to undertake. Further, almost all white Northern soldiers fought TO PRESERVE THE UNION -- they couldn't have cared less about slavery in the South (as FEW were Abolitionists) as long as slavery STAYED in the South. And after Emancipation, that freed blacks STAYED in the South. The LAST thing Northerners wanted was huge numbers of blacks moving to Northern cities after the war...but they did anyway. Whatever, so much for most Northerners caring about slaves: They didn't.

As for courts, the only thing the SCOTUS can rule -- when it comes to RIGHTS, such as the Bill of Rights in general and the 2nd Amendment in particular -- is to AFFRIM those rights, not erode or infringe upon them, or even "grant" them. The SCOTUS doing any of the latter SHOULD have its rulings disrespected and nullified...if not by the Executive Branch, ie.e, the President, then by We the People.

I wish we had a President today similar to Andrew Jackson, at least in one way: If the SCOTUS rendered ANY ruling eroding/infringing upon ANY of our basic rights (as per Bill of Rights for example), the Judicial Branch would be told by the President to go ahead and enforce it because the Executive Branch (the President) certainly would not. That would pretty much nullify any unconstitutional ruling the SCOTUS made.

But we don't have such a President...nor have we in past decades, whether he be Democrat or Republican (so I'm not taking political sides there). The Nanny State grows and our rights/freedoms erode -- some more than others -- and especially the 2nd Amendment under attack even more NOW due to some nut in the latest mass-shooting incident. And with MORE such incidents to come in the future, and liberals in WAY more numbers than conservatives, I don't see how the pressure on the 2nd will ever slack off; it's only going to get worse.

Panic guns & ammo buying everytime a shooting event happens or some anti-gun President is elected, is just plain stupid as it does nothing to stop REAL problem of unconstitutional oppression. When are people going to say "enough is enough and we're just not going to take it ANY more?" And MEAN it? DO it?

Well, it probably won't happen as America continues to fragment/Balkanize...it'll be harder and harder to agree on ANYTHING. Heck, it's even becoming increasinlgy more difficult to define (or recognize) an American anymore since we have/hold less and less in common as times goes on. Even something as BASIC as one language.

In short, TOLERANCE is highly over-rated: Sometimes "the right thing to do" (as per Wilford Brimley, if you will) is to be INtolerant with no apologies whatsoever to any "special interest group," and let chips fall where they may.

Well, I think it has been abundantly clear that the gov't cannot protect anyone !

davidmcbeth said:

Well, I think it has been abundantly clear that the gov't cannot protect anyone !

Click to expand...

It's clear that the govt. can't protect anyone, look at Benghazi. The Police aren't charged with protecting one person, that's your responsibility, as I'm sure we're all well aware. The Govt wants to enslave everyone with "entitlements" this is how the Dems and Libs will reign for lack of a better word. Now they'll try to take away the very means we have to ensure our individual liberties. The current president won't enforce current federal laws with regard to marijuana, but is hell bent on enforcing laws that a blue ribbon panel will suggest, in direct contradiction to Constitution. Buying guns and ammo now or anytime is a good idea. The mere fact that last Saturday was the busiest days in my state with regard to State Police background checks, tells the Govt that there are those who value our Constitution. Obama has been the best thing for the gun industry, and I'm sure that just pisses him off.
As for the state of the current Republican party, hats off to those Tea Party candidates who didn't vote for "Plan B.". Unfortunately, the only thing that will curtail Govt spending, is the fiscal cliff. The Govt doles out entitlements like a drug dealer, and it's time the addicts were cut off, they'll have to quit cold turkey.
PS: MERRY CHRISTMAS!

We've been experiencing "the government is going to go bankrupt " thing regularly in the last few decades...and in the end, something ALWAYS gets done at the last minute to avoid that. One side has to cave in, and usually it's the Republican side (lately anyway, being the minority party). And any efforts Republicans make to find a better solution is seen by most airhead "don't know nuttin about the issues" Americans -- and billed by the Democrat political machine -- as being intransigent and obstructive as well. Republicans just can't win.

It seems the issue of whether or not a particular last-minute (literally) solution is really good for the country in the long term isn't important, it's more of "just come up with the money to avoid closing shop any way we can" -- just come up with the money. Or at least get an "emergency budget" to draw it out until we're in the same situation again. Repeat the process...

I don't see much of a future for the Republican Party (for several reasons) but I don't think it should "dumb-down" or sell-out its values/principals to appeal to the average voter, and immigrant voters who are increasing in numbers. If that means it becomes marginalized (or even extinct) in the future, then at least it remained loyal to it's core principles. Maybe at that point the Libertarian Party will have gotten stronger. Or maybe some yet unknown/brand-new party, or possibly a "resurrected" party from our past (PLENTY to choose from). Who knows.

It's said "the people of a nation have the government they deserve" so America at this point in time -- especially evidenced by re-electing Obama -- has exactly what it deserves.

Too bad the REST of us have it also. :-(


On a more lighter note: Merry Christmas to all!

Placementvs.Calibur said:

In the past five years, I've been subjected to the "fundamental change" the President promised. I've been extremely tolerant with regard to gay marriage and the decriminalization of recreational use of marijuana. I could care less about these two issues, and as a conservative Republican, these and abortion aren't my greatest concerns. However, the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is, and where I'm overly tolerant to recognize social issues important to others, why are they not as tolerant to my views? If marriage is considered to be a God given right for the gay community, why aren't my God given rights represented by the media? My question is to those who value our Rights to keep and bear arms, do you fully understand why, and are you willing to fight a tyrannical government to preserve our rights? When does the left become tolerant of my views?
I know damn well why the left wants to limit my magazine capacity, or render me helpless.
An armed person is a citizen, an unarmed person is a subject.

Click to expand...

I want to use an analogy for you. Your property and house are the Constitution and the American way of life. The creek behind your property is the liberals and the destruction of the American way of life. At first you see the creek erosion coming toward your house, it's just a little so you say no big deal I can live with that. Then a little more and you say ok if it stops there I'll be able to live with that. Then one morning you look out to see it's at your door. Now it's to late your done. That is what you are doing when you keep giving an inch, they will get their mile before long. Wars are won with the battles that are fought,large and small. Your views and opinions are yours to have, but don't think for a minute your views on the issues that you mentioned above are not exactly what a liberal would want to hear. Just my opinion.

Sorry, he's not Democrat, he's a Libertarian who doesn't know it yet.

He believes in Freedom for all. Part of that freedom includes association or lack there of.
Drug prohibition and gun regulation are brought to you by the same people. Oppose both.
How does it affect you if two men or women get "married"? Don't give me this 50's family values B.S. or something from the bible. If you want to follow the bible your duty is to mary many women and produce and many offspring as possible. Don't you dare spill that seed.

Abortion kills an average of apx 1.25 million per year in the U.S. going back to 1973 but you will never be able to stop it. I personally find it tragic but the bible condones abortion and infantcide (as long as it's the enemy) and every other evil known to man.

You don't seem to grasp the meaning of the word freedom and are bent on enforcing you views on others. Threatening to fight people like him (or I) in Civil War II or Culture War I is foolish.


P.S. Merry Christmas, remind me to shoot you first if the apocolypse happens.

cloudcroft said:

Wow!!

News Flash: You're no "conservative Republican," not even close! Sounds 100% DEMOCRAT to me.

But you're PARTLY right (or should I say "left"): You ARE what's WRONG with the Republican Party nowadays. "Republicans" like you should get your card pulled and booted out of the Party. Good riddance to you and your ilk!

And BTW...thanks for aiding, abetting and condoning the moral decline of America we are and have been experiencing. Real Americans -- although they are becoming increasingly fewer in numbers and marginalized nowadays -- appreciate your hard work bringing America low and the global joke it is today, I'm sure.

As for you "willing to fight a tyrannical government," *I* would be willing to fight people like you in Civil War II or Culture War I. I do not AT ALL want to "coexist" with your ilk as you all have been responsible for the sorry "nation" we have today. And now with the shootings in Newtown, CT, more repression seems to be on its way. Just that you support gun ownership (as I do) does not AT ALL make us "comrades for the pro-gun cause." Hardly.

Co-existing with you and yours is not an option...so yes, color me INtolerant, with extreme prejudice.

Click to expand...

TNTTNT187 said:

I want to use an analogy for you. Your property and house are the Constitution and the American way of life. The creek behind your property is the liberals and the destruction of the American way of life. At first you see the creek erosion coming toward your house, it's just a little so you say no big deal I can live with that. Then a little more and you say ok if it stops there I'll be able to live with that. Then one morning you look out to see it's at your door. Now it's to late your done. That is what you are doing when you keep giving an inch, they will get their mile before long. Wars are won with the battles that are fought,large and small. Your views and opinions are yours to have, but don't think for a minute your views on the issues that you mentioned above are not exactly what a liberal would want to hear. Just my opinion.

Click to expand...

Go study the constitution again. You've perverted it with your dogma. Drugs, abortion, marriage are not part of the constitution. At least when alcohol was banned it was done through legal means.

Placementvs.Calibur said:

In the past five years, I've been subjected to the "fundamental change" the President promised. I've been extremely tolerant with regard to gay marriage and the decriminalization of recreational use of marijuana. I could care less about these two issues, and as a conservative Republican, these and abortion aren't my greatest concerns. However, the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is, and where I'm overly tolerant to recognize social issues important to others, why are they not as tolerant to my views? If marriage is considered to be a God given right for the gay community, why aren't my God given rights represented by the media? My question is to those who value our Rights to keep and bear arms, do you fully understand why, and are you willing to fight a tyrannical government to preserve our rights? When does the left become tolerant of my views?
I know damn well why the left wants to limit my magazine capacity, or render me helpless.
An armed person is a citizen, an unarmed person is a subject.

Click to expand...

I feel you there and have no answers. I have many gay friends and most (all?) of them are hardcore Obama supporters. Several are anti even though I carry. I think they have been trained to be vocal (gay pride) on politics. Most of my friends and family support our rights, it just seems the gays tend to be more anti. That is my personal experience, I suspect it is the norm.

/rant

ETA: Posted by one of my gay friends, how timely.

Only read the headline so far. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/patri...arriage-lets-vote-on-your-guns_b_2345997.html

eye95 said:

Umm....the first Republican president was not fiscally conservative nor socially liberal. He expanded the power of the federal government tremendously and started the death spiral of the Constitution. He did bring about the end to slavery, but that was not his goal. It was an action he took to accomplish much less altruistic goals.

Click to expand...

Bingo. This is true.

eye95 said:

Umm....the first Republican president was not fiscally conservative nor socially liberal. He expanded the power of the federal government tremendously and started the death spiral of the Constitution. He did bring about the end to slavery, but that was not his goal. It was an action he took to accomplish much less altruistic goals.

Click to expand...

QFT...succinct to the point great post!

sharkey said:

Go study the constitution again. You've perverted it with your dogma. Drugs, abortion, marriage are not part of the constitution. At least when alcohol was banned it was done through legal means.

Click to expand...

Please try not to pervert my statement for your twist. As I stated it's about the Constitution and the American way of life. As your will see in the near future the liberals will be trying to change laws that are based on the 2nd. Amend. rights as well as the American way of life.

"P.S. Merry Christmas, remind me to shoot you first if the apocolypse happens." -- sharkey

SharkBoy: You'd need a bigger boat. ;-)

1. Regardless, that wouldn't be any great accomplishment or loss, partly because I don't expect to live long if such an event occured and partly because I couldn't care less what happens to me, so I have absolutely NOTHING to lose. Not even presently. If YOU do, then you're already at a great disadvantage and playing catch-up.

2. I am pleased to be on the opposite side of you and your ilk. Nothing wrong with choosing sides, especially since people are becoming more polarized every day. Conflicts over all kinds of issues are happening all over the world at a given time, so everyone SHOULD give at least SOME thought to where they stand and why in case such an event (civil unrest/violence) ever happens here. Regardless, when people like YOU and your pervert friends go, it will only make the country better. Instantly. Overnight.

Next up: Getting rid of criminals (also overnight). But that's another topic...

3. I wasn't threatening anyone -- were you (see your words above)? No, I was just stating a fact. You don't need to threaten trash, you just take it to the dumpster. No deep thoughts or emotion, no angst, it's no big deal. Just business, and you just do it. Then forget it. Just the satisfaction of performing one's Civic Duty and a Public Service -- one dumpster at a time.

As for you wishing ANYONE a Merry Christmas, of course you're just being sarcastic, since you demean the Bible. Still, it should be pointed out that you haven't a clue what Christmas is about (like most in America today, even many so-called "Christians" sadly) and so you aren't qualified to do that. Besides, it's clear that you have more serious concerns to address in the time you have left in life anyway. And frankly, considering your present course and consequently where you're going eventually, it's not going to matter.

So say whatever you want, sharkey, but I don't care about nor do I have the time for irrelevant/meaningless things or people.


Okay, I'm done here now in this thread...it's the 23rd and I've places to go and things to do!

Yes, still probably meaningless/trivial pursuits, but still more important than talking to sharkey anymore.

cloudcroft said:

SNIP And BTW...thanks for aiding, abetting and condoning the moral decline of America we are and have been experiencing. Real Americans -- although they are becoming increasingly fewer in numbers and marginalized nowadays -- appreciate your hard work bringing America low and the global joke it is today, I'm sure.

Click to expand...

Wait a minute. Although you don't actually say it, I'm suspicious that you equate government with regulating society and its mores. Do you hold that government's role is regulate mores?

Lincoln used slavery like Obama uses school shootings to further agendas. Lincoln did not care about slavery, and the war was not about slavery. Gun control is not about stopping any type of violence, it is and always has been about control of the people.