rodbender
Regular Member
imported post
Doug Huffman wrote:
Why purposely misquote me. Here is the entire post.
opencarrybilly wrote:
SNIP: "Supporters contended people have a right to congregate in parks without fear or discomfort"
WhichI've never been able to find in theU.S. Constitution anywhere.
Actually, "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence, not the U.S. Constitution.
Nothing would prevent a group from assembling peaceablyjust becausefirearms arearound, so that one gets shot in the butt, too. Pun intended.
Now each statement has been color coded so it will be easier to put everything in context.
How can they use "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" as part of the Constitution when it is not. Your statement that I was resonding tois below.
I did not hear the arguments. I would imagine that the pro-ordinance side found a right to not be offended in "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".
If they were using this phrase, they wereciting a document that has no force of law.
Doug Huffman wrote:
I did not hear the arguments. I would imagine that the pro-ordinance side found a right to not be offended in "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".
rodbender wrote:WhichI've never been able to find in theU.S. Constitution anywhere.
Actually, "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence, not the U.S. Constitution.
What, please, is the significance of differentiating the source of these rights, that I did not make?
The rest of the sentence from the DoI is
the Bill of Rights enumerates some of these 'certain unalienable Rights' including the RKABA.We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Why purposely misquote me. Here is the entire post.
opencarrybilly wrote:
Both sides cited the Constitution. But, I am at a loss to understandhow the Constitution can be construed to support the anti-gun side here. Can someone explain?
SNIP: "Supporters contended people have a right to congregate in parks without fear or discomfort"
WhichI've never been able to find in theU.S. Constitution anywhere.
Actually, "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence, not the U.S. Constitution.
Nothing would prevent a group from assembling peaceablyjust becausefirearms arearound, so that one gets shot in the butt, too. Pun intended.
Now each statement has been color coded so it will be easier to put everything in context.
How can they use "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" as part of the Constitution when it is not. Your statement that I was resonding tois below.
I did not hear the arguments. I would imagine that the pro-ordinance side found a right to not be offended in "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".
If they were using this phrase, they wereciting a document that has no force of law.