| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:38 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
 |
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:05:24 -0500, sk8r-365
<sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
| Quote: | "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal;
|
At the time leaving women and blacks out.
So much for "Founders" views not viewed through today's
society. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:39 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:48:34 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
<cs@doj.gov> wrote:
| Quote: | Last I heard, you don't get to unilaterally decide
that.
Perhaps you aren't so well read then.
|
Tell, ya what
When I see a court decision with your name on the
majority opinion, I'll concede the point. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:41 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:19:47 -0500, sk8r-365
<sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
| Quote: | It's only lawful because of Roe v. Wade. What happens if you get your
way and it becomes unlawful?
If I have my way, as you put it, 1.4 million children won't be killed in
the womb in the U.S. this year. Josh, at what are driving?
|
They aren't "Children" they are blobs and fetuses
Most know the propaganda trick of assigning emotional
appeal, or re-labeling for political gain is effective.
The "rights" of blobs and Fetuses are connected to the
mothers rights. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:42 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:43:55 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
<cs@doj.gov> wrote:
| Quote: |
True. By implication you seem to be saying that the 14th amendment over
rule the 4th and 5th. Please show where the 14th says that.
|
By application and doctrine in place and legally
tested. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Curly Surmudgeon
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 1:39 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:30:38 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
| Quote: | On Aug 25, 11:43 am, Curly Surmudgeon <c...@doj.gov> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 05:44:45 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
On Aug 25, 12:33 am, Curly Surmudgeon <c...@doj.gov> wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:09:08 -0400, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 19:43:39 -0400, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 18:19:16 -0400, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
That was but one example, the Fed is responsible for many privacy
violations such as Income Tax which clearly violates the 4th and 5th
amendment.
The income tax was enacted by the 16th Amendment, which supersedes any
amendments that came previously.
True but the implementation still violates the 4th and 5th amendment.
By definition, those aspects of the 4th and 5th no longer apply per the
consent of a super majority of the governed, so they can't be violated.
Irrelevant, no vote, law, edict, regulation, or requirement can overturn
the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution.
A Constitutional Amendment can.
True. By implication you seem to be saying that the 14th amendment over
rule the 4th and 5th. Please show where the 14th says that.
It's the 16th. And it explicitly calls for an income tax:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Josh Rosenbluth
|
Right, the 16th, but there is no clause in there that states that "taxes
on income" can violate either the 4th or 5th amendment.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republican Values: Torture, Rape and Lies
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
sk8r-365
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:44 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Nicklas@Click.com typed:
| Quote: | On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:05:24 -0500, sk8r-365
sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal;
At the time leaving women and blacks out.
So much for "Founders" views not viewed through today's
society.
|
Many in the first Constitutional Convention did not think as you say; so
much for short-sighted comprehension on your part. Because of their
current social norms and industry, not unlike today's big abortion
business, those problems were left deliberately for later correction.
Unlike our ancestors who corrected those miscarriages, abortionists
still treat the unborn as sub/non-human. Will they ever learn? (That's
rhetorical).
- sk8r-365
--
"Books constitute capital. A library book lasts as long as a house, for
hundreds of years. It is not, then, an article of mere consumption but
fairly of capital, and often in the case of professional men, setting
out in life, it is their only capital." - Thomas Jefferson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
sk8r-365
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:47 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Nicklas@Click.com typed:
| Quote: | On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:19:47 -0500, sk8r-365
sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
It's only lawful because of Roe v. Wade. What happens if you get your
way and it becomes unlawful?
If I have my way, as you put it, 1.4 million children won't be killed in
the womb in the U.S. this year. Josh, at what are driving?
They aren't "Children" they are blobs and fetuses
Most know the propaganda trick of assigning emotional
appeal, or re-labeling for political gain is effective.
The "rights" of blobs and Fetuses are connected to the
mothers rights.
|
You are deliberately and blatantly blind to the truth for whatever
agenda suiting you. Here, take these ear plugs, they'll help keep the
sand outta your ears.
--
sk8r-365
"Delay is preferable to error." - Thomas Jefferson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Curly Surmudgeon
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:57 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:34:12 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
| Quote: | On Aug 25, 4:39 pm, Curly Surmudgeon <c...@doj.gov> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:30:38 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
On Aug 25, 11:43 am, Curly Surmudgeon <c...@doj.gov> wrote:
Irrelevant, no vote, law, edict, regulation, or requirement can overturn
the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution.
A Constitutional Amendment can.
True. By implication you seem to be saying that the 14th amendment over
rule the 4th and 5th. Please show where the 14th says that.
It's the 16th. And it explicitly calls for an income tax:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Right, the 16th, but there is no clause in there that states that "taxes
on income" can violate either the 4th or 5th amendment.
Each amendment supersedes any and all prior contrary provisions,
including those in the Bill of Rights.
For example, the Flag Burning Amendment ("The Congress shall have
power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United
States") has come very close to passing Congress. If it did, and was
ratified by the states, it would supersede the First Amendment, which
currently protects flag burning under Free Speech.
Josh Rosenbluth
|
Not unless specifically called out. For instance the 21st Amendment
specifically targeted the 18th and the 14th specifically spoke to
representtaion.
Authorizing "Income Tax" does not negate the 4th and 5th Amendments.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republican Values: Torture, Rape and Lies
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
sk8r-365
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:59 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Josh Rosenbluth typed:
| Quote: | On Aug 25, 12:19 pm, sk8r-365 <sk8r-...@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org
wrote:
Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Josh Rosenbluth typed:
It's only lawful because of Roe v. Wade. What happens if you get your
way and it becomes unlawful?
If I have my way, as you put it, 1.4 million children won't be killed in
the womb in the U.S. this year. Josh, at what are driving?
Whether you truely believe a fetus is no different than a newborn (or
you and me) in terms of legal rights. If it is, then logic demands
you punish a woman who gets an abortion as a murderer for hire.
|
I'll let God judge her, the doctor and you, as-well-as, me. No BS will
work that Day. Try as you may, your argument is baseless dribble
contrived from your foolishness. I'd *guess* you have killed children
and seek self-propitiation and approval from others ... ain't happening
here.
| Quote: | Doesn't logic demand she be treated the same as a mother who hires a
doctor to kill her newborn, i.e. to be prosecuted for murder for hire?
I've been clear.
No you have not. You have ducked the issue.
|
Then you are remarkably stupid, or steeped in great denial, to have NOT
understood what has been plainly laid before you. There's only hope in
God for your wellbeing.
You won't get this, I suspect, but it applies to you at this juncture of
your non-fetal period, "Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
lest you also be like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he
be wise in his own eyes." Proverbs 26:4¿5.
--
sk8r-365
"Delay is preferable to error." - Thomas Jefferson |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Curly Surmudgeon
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:59 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:44:33 -0500, sk8r-365 wrote:
| Quote: | Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Nicklas@Click.com typed:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:05:24 -0500, sk8r-365
sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal;
At the time leaving women and blacks out.
So much for "Founders" views not viewed through today's
society.
Many in the first Constitutional Convention did not think as you say; so
much for short-sighted comprehension on your part. Because of their
current social norms and industry, not unlike today's big abortion
business, those problems were left deliberately for later correction.
Unlike our ancestors who corrected those miscarriages, abortionists
still treat the unborn as sub/non-human. Will they ever learn? (That's
rhetorical).
- sk8r-365
|
Unlike our ancestors, Roe v. Wade put the barbarians back on a leash.
When will you crazymotherfuckers learn that your fantasies do not extend
to the rights of others. Real people, not a lump of protoplasm.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republican Values: Torture, Rape and Lies
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Curly Surmudgeon
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:00 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:47:36 -0500, sk8r-365 wrote:
| Quote: | Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Nicklas@Click.com typed:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:19:47 -0500, sk8r-365
sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
It's only lawful because of Roe v. Wade. What happens if you get your
way and it becomes unlawful?
If I have my way, as you put it, 1.4 million children won't be killed in
the womb in the U.S. this year. Josh, at what are driving?
They aren't "Children" they are blobs and fetuses
Most know the propaganda trick of assigning emotional
appeal, or re-labeling for political gain is effective.
The "rights" of blobs and Fetuses are connected to the
mothers rights.
You are deliberately and blatantly blind to the truth for whatever
agenda suiting you. Here, take these ear plugs, they'll help keep the
sand outta your ears.
|
You are deliberately misrepresenting the English dictionary. Take the
bible out of your ass and walk like a human.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republican Values: Torture, Rape and Lies
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Josh Rosenbluth
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:53 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Aug 25, 7:57 pm, Curly Surmudgeon <c...@doj.gov> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:34:12 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
On Aug 25, 4:39 pm, Curly Surmudgeon <c...@doj.gov> wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:30:38 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
On Aug 25, 11:43 am, Curly Surmudgeon <c...@doj.gov> wrote:
Irrelevant, no vote, law, edict, regulation, or requirement can overturn
the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution.
A Constitutional Amendment can.
True. By implication you seem to be saying that the 14th amendment over
rule the 4th and 5th. Please show where the 14th says that.
It's the 16th. And it explicitly calls for an income tax:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Right, the 16th, but there is no clause in there that states that "taxes
on income" can violate either the 4th or 5th amendment.
Each amendment supersedes any and all prior contrary provisions,
including those in the Bill of Rights.
For example, the Flag Burning Amendment ("The Congress shall have
power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United
States") has come very close to passing Congress. If it did, and was
ratified by the states, it would supersede the First Amendment, which
currently protects flag burning under Free Speech.
Not unless specifically called out.
|
You are wrong, as my Flag Burning Amendment example shows.
Josh Rosenbluth |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Josh Rosenbluth
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:58 am Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Aug 25, 7:59 pm, sk8r-365 <sk8r-...@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org>
wrote:
| Quote: | Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Josh Rosenbluth typed:
On Aug 25, 12:19 pm, sk8r-365 <sk8r-...@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org
wrote:
Feverishly pounding upon a keyboard Josh Rosenbluth typed:
It's only lawful because of Roe v. Wade. What happens if you get your
way and it becomes unlawful?
If I have my way, as you put it, 1.4 million children won't be killed in
the womb in the U.S. this year. Josh, at what are driving?
Whether you truely believe a fetus is no different than a newborn (or
you and me) in terms of legal rights. If it is, then logic demands
you punish a woman who gets an abortion as a murderer for hire.
I'll let God judge her, the doctor and you, as-well-as, me.
|
Yet, we don't find it sufficient for God to judge a woman who hires a
doctior to kill her newborn. Instead, we prosecute her as a murderer
for hire. In your opinion, should we stop doing that, and only allow
God to judge her? If not, then why should we prosecute her, and not a
woman who hires a doctor to kill her (as you put it) pre-born child?
Josh Rosenbluth |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:32 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:47:36 -0500, sk8r-365
<sk8r-365@sk8r.debian.etch.invalid.org> wrote:
| Quote: | The "rights" of blobs and Fetuses are connected to the
mothers rights.
You are deliberately and blatantly blind to the truth
|
"Truth" is an actual representation of events.
What you want to do, is substitute your opinion and
call it truth. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:36 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama supports "live birth abortion" |
|
|
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:39:27 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
<cs@doj.gov> wrote:
| Quote: | It's the 16th. And it explicitly calls for an income tax:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Josh Rosenbluth
Right, the 16th, but there is no clause in there that states that "taxes
on income" can violate either the 4th or 5th amendment.
|
Neither the 4th or the 5th are relevant to taxation. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
