1. In your discussions of the Constitution and the Declaration you do a good deal of interpretation.steve74baywin wrote:I either disagree with you or I don't understand what you are saying.Lanval wrote:This:
and this:steve74baywin wrote:The point I make often, people were deceived into thinking they need the gov to violate someones rights to property for their own good, after they get the people to do this they have the people by the balls, cause the people have just begged the gov to throw away the very thing we fought for, protection of rights. So now the people rights are violated often, things are turned upside down and we now look to a mommy gov to tell us our rights.
Steve, why should I (or anyone) take seriously your discussion of rights and constitutional interpretation when you don't even know/understand basic elements of the history of this country?steve74baywin wrote:Tell me more about this Potato famine.
Your comments are dismissive of others in a way that's wholly surprising given how often you are the one lacking in understanding or knowledge ~ as above; why do you assume that Russell not agreeing with you is the same as not understanding? A: Because you believe you see The Truth and that anyone else who sees it will by extension will agree with you. No. Many of your basic assumptions about the nature of the US, and it's form of government, are wrong; not opinion wrong, factually wrong. Which in turn forces even people who might otherwise agree with the aims of your beliefs to argue against you.
You would do well to arm yourself with fewer claims of "conspiracy" and more knowledge of the context and history of the things you discuss. Operating in ignorance and expecting the rest of us to treat you like an oracle is not going to achieve your desires ~ if in fact you wish to reveal some hidden "truth" to the greater collective here.
Best,
Michael L
Please clarify.
2. Interpretation depends upon context.
3. The context for the Constitution and the Declaration is US History.
4. You apparently don't know simple, basic facts about US History.
Thus, your discussion = not convincing.
Mike