OMG – Someone please control Christine O’donnell

[aldante]

Afx –
I did not find that article germaine to the point. We do not live in a theocracy. The ideas of the enlightenment and man’s individuality are at least as important to our constitution (imho) as our common ideas of right or wrong.
The point is this: I did not say all our commonality had to do with believing the same thing but that we hold some important beliefs in common. 4 out of 10. Hell if most marriages had that kind of compatiblity maybe the divorce rate would be a lot less.
More important to the point at hand is that the constitution does not codify those common idea’s but bases its intent in them.
Most “todays” liberals would have you believe that if you believe in these common ideas that you are a in favor of the state enforceing them upon you. That is becasue “todays” liberals believe that the state is the ultimate authority.
A true liberal believes that we have inalienable rights and no matter who tries they can not be taken away….only given away. Here is Wikipedia on the topic:

While the existence of legal rights has always been uncontroversial, the idea that certain rights are natural or inalienable also has a long history dating back at least to the Stoics of late Antiquity and Catholic law of the early Middle Ages, and descending through the Protestant Reformation and the Age of Enlightenment to today.

So while todays liberal tries to tell me that I have to pay for someone elses healthcare becasue the state says it is their “right” a true liberal says that can only be enfoced by force. ie, the IRS. Meanwhile no one can take my right away to believe what I want to believe.

So our constitution does not say you must believe in the 10 commandments but I think that and other “truths” were used in it’s intent.

And by the way….the founders wanted the Constitution to be “living”…that is why there are two ways of amending it.

[afx114]

I agree with most of your post aldante (liberal bashing aside). My rants were directed more towards the type of people who think like the subject of this thread.

Sure, government can take away your right to life by imprisoning or killing you. But if you want to use that argument you have to accept the flipside that government can also help protect your right to life (via the same means they can use to take it away — security, military, police, etc). I may have an inalienable right to property and life, but unless the police are there to prevent some thug from stealing my shit and shanking me in my front yard, those inalienable rights seem pretty useless to me. I suppose I could defend myself (via my inalienable right to own firearms), but what if said thug is actually a foreign army? Does not government play a role here in protecting my inalienable rights? Theoretically, shouldn’t that be the entire purpose of government? Does believing so make me a “todays” liberal?

I fail to see how God would be able to protect my inalienable rights. Perhaps by striking down an invading army with lightning, or perhaps turning water into wine? That would be sweeet! It is my inalienable right to get a buzz on as I see fit.

I would hope that our rights come from logic and reason (which I would also hope, as our founding fathers did, would eventually lead to a perfect form of government protecting said rights). I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude). These are my beliefs in theory, of course, and I agree that in practice, reality doesn’t quite live up to the expectations. But what can you do? *shrug*

And no, we do not live in a theocracy. But the person about which this thread was started would very much like to see it become one.

[afx114]

I agree with most of your post aldante (liberal bashing aside). My rants were directed more towards the type of people who think like the subject of this thread.

Sure, government can take away your right to life by imprisoning or killing you. But if you want to use that argument you have to accept the flipside that government can also help protect your right to life (via the same means they can use to take it away — security, military, police, etc). I may have an inalienable right to property and life, but unless the police are there to prevent some thug from stealing my shit and shanking me in my front yard, those inalienable rights seem pretty useless to me. I suppose I could defend myself (via my inalienable right to own firearms), but what if said thug is actually a foreign army? Does not government play a role here in protecting my inalienable rights? Theoretically, shouldn’t that be the entire purpose of government? Does believing so make me a “todays” liberal?

I fail to see how God would be able to protect my inalienable rights. Perhaps by striking down an invading army with lightning, or perhaps turning water into wine? That would be sweeet! It is my inalienable right to get a buzz on as I see fit.

I would hope that our rights come from logic and reason (which I would also hope, as our founding fathers did, would eventually lead to a perfect form of government protecting said rights). I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude). These are my beliefs in theory, of course, and I agree that in practice, reality doesn’t quite live up to the expectations. But what can you do? *shrug*

And no, we do not live in a theocracy. But the person about which this thread was started would very much like to see it become one.

[afx114]

I agree with most of your post aldante (liberal bashing aside). My rants were directed more towards the type of people who think like the subject of this thread.

Sure, government can take away your right to life by imprisoning or killing you. But if you want to use that argument you have to accept the flipside that government can also help protect your right to life (via the same means they can use to take it away — security, military, police, etc). I may have an inalienable right to property and life, but unless the police are there to prevent some thug from stealing my shit and shanking me in my front yard, those inalienable rights seem pretty useless to me. I suppose I could defend myself (via my inalienable right to own firearms), but what if said thug is actually a foreign army? Does not government play a role here in protecting my inalienable rights? Theoretically, shouldn’t that be the entire purpose of government? Does believing so make me a “todays” liberal?

I fail to see how God would be able to protect my inalienable rights. Perhaps by striking down an invading army with lightning, or perhaps turning water into wine? That would be sweeet! It is my inalienable right to get a buzz on as I see fit.

I would hope that our rights come from logic and reason (which I would also hope, as our founding fathers did, would eventually lead to a perfect form of government protecting said rights). I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude). These are my beliefs in theory, of course, and I agree that in practice, reality doesn’t quite live up to the expectations. But what can you do? *shrug*

And no, we do not live in a theocracy. But the person about which this thread was started would very much like to see it become one.

[afx114]

I agree with most of your post aldante (liberal bashing aside). My rants were directed more towards the type of people who think like the subject of this thread.

Sure, government can take away your right to life by imprisoning or killing you. But if you want to use that argument you have to accept the flipside that government can also help protect your right to life (via the same means they can use to take it away — security, military, police, etc). I may have an inalienable right to property and life, but unless the police are there to prevent some thug from stealing my shit and shanking me in my front yard, those inalienable rights seem pretty useless to me. I suppose I could defend myself (via my inalienable right to own firearms), but what if said thug is actually a foreign army? Does not government play a role here in protecting my inalienable rights? Theoretically, shouldn’t that be the entire purpose of government? Does believing so make me a “todays” liberal?

I fail to see how God would be able to protect my inalienable rights. Perhaps by striking down an invading army with lightning, or perhaps turning water into wine? That would be sweeet! It is my inalienable right to get a buzz on as I see fit.

I would hope that our rights come from logic and reason (which I would also hope, as our founding fathers did, would eventually lead to a perfect form of government protecting said rights). I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude). These are my beliefs in theory, of course, and I agree that in practice, reality doesn’t quite live up to the expectations. But what can you do? *shrug*

And no, we do not live in a theocracy. But the person about which this thread was started would very much like to see it become one.

[afx114]

I agree with most of your post aldante (liberal bashing aside). My rants were directed more towards the type of people who think like the subject of this thread.

Sure, government can take away your right to life by imprisoning or killing you. But if you want to use that argument you have to accept the flipside that government can also help protect your right to life (via the same means they can use to take it away — security, military, police, etc). I may have an inalienable right to property and life, but unless the police are there to prevent some thug from stealing my shit and shanking me in my front yard, those inalienable rights seem pretty useless to me. I suppose I could defend myself (via my inalienable right to own firearms), but what if said thug is actually a foreign army? Does not government play a role here in protecting my inalienable rights? Theoretically, shouldn’t that be the entire purpose of government? Does believing so make me a “todays” liberal?

I fail to see how God would be able to protect my inalienable rights. Perhaps by striking down an invading army with lightning, or perhaps turning water into wine? That would be sweeet! It is my inalienable right to get a buzz on as I see fit.

I would hope that our rights come from logic and reason (which I would also hope, as our founding fathers did, would eventually lead to a perfect form of government protecting said rights). I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude). These are my beliefs in theory, of course, and I agree that in practice, reality doesn’t quite live up to the expectations. But what can you do? *shrug*

And no, we do not live in a theocracy. But the person about which this thread was started would very much like to see it become one.

[aldante]

Afx said….
I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude).

*****THE DUDE******
Believe it or not I saw that movie for the first time 3weeks ago!

I appreciate your post. I guess the our disagreement lies in where our collective “logic and reason” came from. To the point of this particular thread, I think that it is unavoidable that our founders held “certain truths to be self evident” and at least in part this explains the founding of this country. I will never try an foist my beliefs on others – and I don’t want theirs foisted upon me. Our government exists only by society letting it exist. I think the reason society lets it exists is some of the things you mentioned – I can’t guard my property 24 hours a day. Therefore it benefits most of its citizens. But when I have to defend my property from the government (forced health care or abuse of eminent domain) then it starts to become a foe rather then an ally. When the government threatens my privacy then it is encroaching and it needs to be pushed back. When it takes my tax dollars and bombs innocents around the world without a declaration of war it needs to be reigned in. Where is the logic in that by the way?? Innocent children dead becasue it is acceptable to (who?) not me. None of the Generals or smart guys have been able to convince most people that it is logical and yet it happens all the time. Not to mention the dead Americans. That is the benefit of the tea party (it has many problems I admit). The benefit trying to stop the run away size of Government. The disenfranchisement of our citizenry. The tea party is the body politic at its most elemental. Look at the established Republicans that it has taken down already. Speaking of O’Donnell – I loved watching Karl Rove (Devil Incarnate) squirm when she won. That was worth it right there!!!!
I think a Christine O’Donnell or a Rand Paul is far less dangerous to our society thes someone like Chris Dodd or Barney Frank!

[aldante]

Afx said….
I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude).

*****THE DUDE******
Believe it or not I saw that movie for the first time 3weeks ago!

I appreciate your post. I guess the our disagreement lies in where our collective “logic and reason” came from. To the point of this particular thread, I think that it is unavoidable that our founders held “certain truths to be self evident” and at least in part this explains the founding of this country. I will never try an foist my beliefs on others – and I don’t want theirs foisted upon me. Our government exists only by society letting it exist. I think the reason society lets it exists is some of the things you mentioned – I can’t guard my property 24 hours a day. Therefore it benefits most of its citizens. But when I have to defend my property from the government (forced health care or abuse of eminent domain) then it starts to become a foe rather then an ally. When the government threatens my privacy then it is encroaching and it needs to be pushed back. When it takes my tax dollars and bombs innocents around the world without a declaration of war it needs to be reigned in. Where is the logic in that by the way?? Innocent children dead becasue it is acceptable to (who?) not me. None of the Generals or smart guys have been able to convince most people that it is logical and yet it happens all the time. Not to mention the dead Americans. That is the benefit of the tea party (it has many problems I admit). The benefit trying to stop the run away size of Government. The disenfranchisement of our citizenry. The tea party is the body politic at its most elemental. Look at the established Republicans that it has taken down already. Speaking of O’Donnell – I loved watching Karl Rove (Devil Incarnate) squirm when she won. That was worth it right there!!!!
I think a Christine O’Donnell or a Rand Paul is far less dangerous to our society thes someone like Chris Dodd or Barney Frank!

[aldante]

Afx said….
I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude).

*****THE DUDE******
Believe it or not I saw that movie for the first time 3weeks ago!

I appreciate your post. I guess the our disagreement lies in where our collective “logic and reason” came from. To the point of this particular thread, I think that it is unavoidable that our founders held “certain truths to be self evident” and at least in part this explains the founding of this country. I will never try an foist my beliefs on others – and I don’t want theirs foisted upon me. Our government exists only by society letting it exist. I think the reason society lets it exists is some of the things you mentioned – I can’t guard my property 24 hours a day. Therefore it benefits most of its citizens. But when I have to defend my property from the government (forced health care or abuse of eminent domain) then it starts to become a foe rather then an ally. When the government threatens my privacy then it is encroaching and it needs to be pushed back. When it takes my tax dollars and bombs innocents around the world without a declaration of war it needs to be reigned in. Where is the logic in that by the way?? Innocent children dead becasue it is acceptable to (who?) not me. None of the Generals or smart guys have been able to convince most people that it is logical and yet it happens all the time. Not to mention the dead Americans. That is the benefit of the tea party (it has many problems I admit). The benefit trying to stop the run away size of Government. The disenfranchisement of our citizenry. The tea party is the body politic at its most elemental. Look at the established Republicans that it has taken down already. Speaking of O’Donnell – I loved watching Karl Rove (Devil Incarnate) squirm when she won. That was worth it right there!!!!
I think a Christine O’Donnell or a Rand Paul is far less dangerous to our society thes someone like Chris Dodd or Barney Frank!

[aldante]

Afx said….
I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude).

*****THE DUDE******
Believe it or not I saw that movie for the first time 3weeks ago!

I appreciate your post. I guess the our disagreement lies in where our collective “logic and reason” came from. To the point of this particular thread, I think that it is unavoidable that our founders held “certain truths to be self evident” and at least in part this explains the founding of this country. I will never try an foist my beliefs on others – and I don’t want theirs foisted upon me. Our government exists only by society letting it exist. I think the reason society lets it exists is some of the things you mentioned – I can’t guard my property 24 hours a day. Therefore it benefits most of its citizens. But when I have to defend my property from the government (forced health care or abuse of eminent domain) then it starts to become a foe rather then an ally. When the government threatens my privacy then it is encroaching and it needs to be pushed back. When it takes my tax dollars and bombs innocents around the world without a declaration of war it needs to be reigned in. Where is the logic in that by the way?? Innocent children dead becasue it is acceptable to (who?) not me. None of the Generals or smart guys have been able to convince most people that it is logical and yet it happens all the time. Not to mention the dead Americans. That is the benefit of the tea party (it has many problems I admit). The benefit trying to stop the run away size of Government. The disenfranchisement of our citizenry. The tea party is the body politic at its most elemental. Look at the established Republicans that it has taken down already. Speaking of O’Donnell – I loved watching Karl Rove (Devil Incarnate) squirm when she won. That was worth it right there!!!!
I think a Christine O’Donnell or a Rand Paul is far less dangerous to our society thes someone like Chris Dodd or Barney Frank!

[aldante]

Afx said….
I do not believe that our rights come from some magical bearded dude in the clouds (unless it’s The Dude).

*****THE DUDE******
Believe it or not I saw that movie for the first time 3weeks ago!

I appreciate your post. I guess the our disagreement lies in where our collective “logic and reason” came from. To the point of this particular thread, I think that it is unavoidable that our founders held “certain truths to be self evident” and at least in part this explains the founding of this country. I will never try an foist my beliefs on others – and I don’t want theirs foisted upon me. Our government exists only by society letting it exist. I think the reason society lets it exists is some of the things you mentioned – I can’t guard my property 24 hours a day. Therefore it benefits most of its citizens. But when I have to defend my property from the government (forced health care or abuse of eminent domain) then it starts to become a foe rather then an ally. When the government threatens my privacy then it is encroaching and it needs to be pushed back. When it takes my tax dollars and bombs innocents around the world without a declaration of war it needs to be reigned in. Where is the logic in that by the way?? Innocent children dead becasue it is acceptable to (who?) not me. None of the Generals or smart guys have been able to convince most people that it is logical and yet it happens all the time. Not to mention the dead Americans. That is the benefit of the tea party (it has many problems I admit). The benefit trying to stop the run away size of Government. The disenfranchisement of our citizenry. The tea party is the body politic at its most elemental. Look at the established Republicans that it has taken down already. Speaking of O’Donnell – I loved watching Karl Rove (Devil Incarnate) squirm when she won. That was worth it right there!!!!
I think a Christine O’Donnell or a Rand Paul is far less dangerous to our society thes someone like Chris Dodd or Barney Frank!

[afx114]

I agree that in theory the Tea Party (and 3rd parties in general) are a great idea that can be a balancing force. Unfortunately what has happened is that the movement has been co-opted by the big boys and they have nurtured it into a Frankenstein that is sure to eat its own creator. I don’t think it serves anyone well, except for certain Democratic candidates in Delaware.

[afx114]

I agree that in theory the Tea Party (and 3rd parties in general) are a great idea that can be a balancing force. Unfortunately what has happened is that the movement has been co-opted by the big boys and they have nurtured it into a Frankenstein that is sure to eat its own creator. I don’t think it serves anyone well, except for certain Democratic candidates in Delaware.

[afx114]

I agree that in theory the Tea Party (and 3rd parties in general) are a great idea that can be a balancing force. Unfortunately what has happened is that the movement has been co-opted by the big boys and they have nurtured it into a Frankenstein that is sure to eat its own creator. I don’t think it serves anyone well, except for certain Democratic candidates in Delaware.

[afx114]

I agree that in theory the Tea Party (and 3rd parties in general) are a great idea that can be a balancing force. Unfortunately what has happened is that the movement has been co-opted by the big boys and they have nurtured it into a Frankenstein that is sure to eat its own creator. I don’t think it serves anyone well, except for certain Democratic candidates in Delaware.

[Author]

Posts