-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
‘We the People’ Loses Appeal With People Around the World
- Thread starter ThatOneChick
- Start date
ThatOneChick
Regular Member
I agree. Didn't intend to kick up a storm lol. Mah bad.
No its ok, most of it was fine, just the last bunch have been... less than stellar. Plus, storms and duds are about all that happens.
georg jetson
Regular Member
Just for snots and giggles, I check out the South African Constitution Ruth Ginsberg recommended...
Of course there is nothing guarantying the right to keep and bear arms.
I thought this was interesting though;
39. Interpretation of Bill of Rights
When interpreting the Bill of Rights, a court, tribunal or forum *
must promote the values that underlie an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom;
must consider international law; and
may consider foreign law.
Of course there is nothing guarantying the right to keep and bear arms.
I thought this was interesting though;
39. Interpretation of Bill of Rights
When interpreting the Bill of Rights, a court, tribunal or forum *
must promote the values that underlie an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom;
must consider international law; and
may consider foreign law.
Last edited:
This allows for the Oligarchy of Judges.
Gil223
Regular Member
We are entitled to food????
Sweet, the money I save from buying food can go to another gun!
The phrase "We the People" lost appeal to our elected government officials long ago. We have a Congress, whose concern is no longer "What is most beneficial to our country?", but rather, "How can our personal portfolios benefit from the passage of this legislation?"
I think that any "entitlement" to food - or any goods or services - follows ones entitlement to work and their entitlement to buy their groceries, etc., like the rest of us. Entitlements are the bait and backbone of the socialist-"progressives". The only things we are "entitled" to in our democratic republic are those things specified in the Bill of Rights, and - IMHO -the opportunity to benefit from our personal labors.
Although it sounds like an ideal worth supporting, the United Nations "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" becomes a bit disconcerting as you approach the end (Articles 29/30) of it:
Article 29. (if you want the details of "Blahblahblah", or the entire U.N Declaration see: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ )
(1) Blahblahblah...
(2) Blahblahblah...
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. (emphases added)
Between that, and the UNs designs to impose their "global gun ban" (via elimination of privately owned firearms) on the entire world, they represent only the interests of the world-wide, socialist-"progressive" movement, whose main theme seems to be "You exist, therefore you are entitled (so long as you own no guns)!"
As Thomas Jefferson said: "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." That would include "redistribution". (It is not my intent to turn this into a political discussion, and I will pursue it no further. The prior introduction of the concept of "entitlement" kinda opened that door.) Pax...
P.S. But I DO like your way of thinking on what to do with the extra money you'd have!
Last edited: