(06-28-2022, 02:46 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Good grief, the hysteria is comical....

(06-28-2022, 08:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: See, where I fall on these things is not having the government have a law AGAINST something that doesn't affect anyone else.

Abortion.  Personal choice.  Will not affect another person.

So if a business wants to fire you for getting an abortion I'd be against that.

Vaccines.  Personal choice BUT can affect people around you.

So if businesses mandate the vaccine and you refuse for no other reason than you're autonomy then that's on you...but you run the risk of affecting your coworkers and/or customers.

How about just getting pregnant?

If a business says single women can't get pregnant and they fire you for it that's on you too...but you aren't affecting anyone else so I disagree with it.

It's a fine line.

Edit:  This said it better than I did.

(06-28-2022, 09:18 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Not sure what being white has to do with anything, but anyway what is the guy’s suggestion?  Either you draft a new constitution or you follow the one you have.  Should we listen to the white dudes when they say you have to have a fair trial and are entitled to representation?  How about search and seizure?  Can we just ignore that because some white slave owners said the government can’t do that without a warrant?

(06-28-2022, 04:00 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Would you say that owning slaves made a person an inherently bad person?  Would such behavior taint everything else said person did?

(06-28-2022, 09:18 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Not sure what being white has to do with anything, but anyway what is the guy’s suggestion?  Either you draft a new constitution or you follow the one you have.  Should we listen to the white dudes when they say you have to have a fair trial and are entitled to representation?  How about search and seizure?  Can we just ignore that because some white slave owners said the government can’t do that without a warrant?

Quote:In an 1816 letter to Virginia lawyer Samuel Kercheval on the subject of calling a convention to revise the state's constitution, Jefferson stated that a constitution should be revised every 19 to 20 years. Jefferson's proposed time period was based on the era's mortality rate. Since a majority of adults at any point in time would likely be dead in approximately 19 years, he reasoned, a new generation should have the right to adapt its government to changing circumstances instead of being ruled by the past.

(06-28-2022, 10:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: Wasn't it Jefferson who suggested a new constitution every so often?

https://classroom.synonym.com/


Like I said though rights that help people live better lives vs taking away rights and writing laws that deny people those rights.

Sure they got things right and wrong.  In the end they were still were not caring about any except people like themselves.  It's a tough pill for some to swallow, but its true.  We can't change that they were that way.  That's the way it was at that time.

That we eventually gave those same rights to most people isn't the point.

Look at the proud boys and their ilk complaining about prisons and how they are treated.  Think they cared before it happened to them?  Of course not. 

So another decision is that Miranda doesn't matter anymore.  Police don't have read you your rights when the arrest you. Was that a good decision?  Some would say no as most people may not know their rights.  Some would say yes because they don't want the police being sued.  

Personally I think that's a bad decision because it takes away a protection for people.  But there are those who will disagree because there was a "legal basis" for it.

As I said, fine line but I will always side with equality and protecting people over "it isn't in there" arguments. Which I know you weren't making but has been made.

(06-28-2022, 09:18 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Not sure what being white has to do with anything, but anyway what is the guy’s suggestion?  Either you draft a new constitution or you follow the one you have.  Should we listen to the white dudes when they say you have to have a fair trial and are entitled to representation?  How about search and seizure?  Can we just ignore that because some white slave owners said the government can’t do that without a warrant?

(06-28-2022, 10:10 PM)michaelsean Wrote: So tweet about a new constitution. Tweeting white guy things that seem clever means nothing.

I have no idea why Miranda was made a constitutional right. I have no problem with laws saying police have to inform people of their right, but I have no idea how it is seen as a right. Things like Miranda are what laws are for.

(06-28-2022, 09:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Excellent post.  Don't expect a coherent answer though, he'll just dodge and obfuscate before taking his ball and going home again.

(06-28-2022, 08:38 PM)GMDino Wrote: You're so angry...lol.

Voting is all well and good, well until the gerrymandered districts are factored in.  And the gop members who won't even certify elections they lost until threatened with lawsuits.  And on and on...

Lots of things aren't there.  Including with the ever so precious 2A...but the courts "interpreted" it in a way that made it what it is today.  Same as abortion was made a right through an interpretation that this court didn't believe in.

Folks never like when then pendulum swings back.

They never will.

Quote:A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

(06-28-2022, 04:00 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Would you say that owning slaves made a person an inherently bad person?  Would such behavior taint everything else said person did?

(06-29-2022, 09:12 AM)Sled21 Wrote: Man you are bad at reading people, I'm not angry at all. I'm loving this court. 

And sure the 2nd Amendment is there, it comes right after the 1st Amendment and before the 3rd.

(06-28-2022, 09:17 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Only if you ignore Clarence's remarks.

*checks your post history*

Oh right.

(06-28-2022, 09:18 PM)michaelsean Wrote:
Not sure what being white has to do with anything, but anyway what is the guy’s suggestion?  Either you draft a new constitution or you follow the one you have.  Should we listen to the white dudes when they say you have to have a fair trial and are entitled to representation?  How about search and seizure?  Can we just ignore that because some white slave owners said the government can’t do that without a warrant?

(06-28-2022, 10:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: Wasn't it Jefferson who suggested a new constitution every so often?

https://classroom.synonym.com/


Like I said though rights that help people live better lives vs taking away rights and writing laws that deny people those rights.

Sure they got things right and wrong.  In the end they were still were not caring about any except people like themselves.  It's a tough pill for some to swallow, but its true.  We can't change that they were that way.  That's the way it was at that time.

That we eventually gave those same rights to most people isn't the point.

Look at the proud boys and their ilk complaining about prisons and how they are treated.  Think they cared before it happened to them?  Of course not. 

So another decision is that Miranda doesn't matter anymore.  Police don't have read you your rights when the arrest you. Was that a good decision?  Some would say no as most people may not know their rights.  Some would say yes because they don't want the police being sued.  

Personally I think that's a bad decision because it takes away a protection for people.  But there are those who will disagree because there was a "legal basis" for it.

As I said, fine line but I will always side with equality and protecting people over "it isn't in there" arguments. Which I know you weren't making but has been made.

(06-28-2022, 09:06 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Calm down, Sally.  You get butthurt on this board so often your casting the accusation at others is laughable.

That reminds me, you didn't answer my earlier question.  Since you seem to be obsessed with some of the Framers being slave owners, kindly answer this question.  Does being a slave owner automatically make you a horrible person?  Does it invalidate all of your beliefs and ideals?  Does it taint everything else you do in your life time?

(06-29-2022, 09:16 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: This is a fascinating question, and I don't think anyone has answered. A short answer would be YES  by modern standards. However, in the case of a person like Washington, or any other members of past society, the answer has to be no. We have to understand the societal norms of that period, as barbaric they may be in today's society, and use this understanding as a way to judge a person. 

(06-29-2022, 06:37 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: To be fair, I am constantly saying we need a new constitution, but nobody listens to me.

Maybe it's because I'm white.



I understand, and if that's the suggestion then make that suggestion.  












/s

(06-29-2022, 09:16 AM)KillerGoose Wrote: This is a fascinating question, and I don't think anyone has answered. A short answer would be YES  by modern standards. However, in the case of a person like Washington, or any other members of past society, the answer has to be no. We have to understand the societal norms of that period, as barbaric they may be in today's society, and use this understanding as a way to judge a person. 

(06-29-2022, 09:18 AM)Sled21 Wrote: It's the left's go to anytime they lose an argument. Racism and sexism. Every time.