Really dork, you really need to do your research, and drop the smug attitude. because Jefferson would disagree with you.
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty . . . And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
just admit you dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about. no one is advocating killing anyone. its a LAST RESORT one we hope to never have to use, but if we dont have the right to do so an no matter how many times you say we dont, you are wrong, Jefferson is right
well a constitutional convention is not quite that easy. if they tried to take away those amendments. thats where the 2nd amendment would come into play. I am willing to die for my country, I am willing to die for my friends and family. I am NOT willing to die for my government.
regardless of your interpretation of it, none of the bullshit you brought up matter. Just because it is unlikely that it will come down to that does not mean that we should change the law or the interpretation of it
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
~Thomas Jefferson
I'll listen to what jefferson has to say on the subject over capitain dork
ok. so we can have exemptions for specific things that are catastrophic. There is no good reason the text of obamacare, or no child left behind for example should not have been made public for a very long time before a vote was held
except for none of what you said matters at all in the reality of it. The 2nd amendment was written for one reason and one reason only. to keep the federal government in text. Its not ambiguous at all, its pretty clear. its 1 god damn sentence which means that the people have the right to protect themselves, from both foreign and domestic threats.
The only people who think there is wiggle room in the constitution, and the 2nd specifically are agenda driven people, people who want to disarm america so that the plutocracy can reign supreme.
how about shaming people who dont work hard? or shaming people who dont participate in civics, local or national? why would you want to shame someone for what is a basic right to self defense??
I guess we could just give everyone rape whistles and everyone will be ok though
how much policy really needs to be made? the government doesnt need to keep writing new laws all the time. I would prefer a government that only does the bare minimum, allocate spending where it needs to go (not where they want it to go) and stop coming up with half baked schemes which inevidibly make things worse
i dont believe term limits will fix everything, but I do feel it would be a good start. while you are right about the institution needing fixing (meaning people need to stop thinking a vote for anyone who is not a D or R is a wasted vote) nothing will change. but i think with term limits you would see less and less of the establishment that we have today and things would move along a little quicker as instead of the same R or D running every 2-6 years for 50 years wont happen and fresh blood is (almost) always good
its just another example of "we have to pass it before we can find out whats in it"
Id love to see a constitutional convention in my lifetime and a few new amendments. Term limits for congress, public debate on all bills (posted in full for public consumption for at least 180 days before a vote) and no secret treaties br> there is more, but that would be a good start
simple solution. Have schools for the learning disabled and tailor the curriculum to them. There is no reason for example an illiterate 18 year old should be i nthe same English class with students without disabilities as it will only stunt their ability to learn
im not saying "kick them out" im saying work to better EVERYONE
When we leave education to the free market, children are illiterate
really? because the Dept of Ed has had a strong hold on education since the 60s and you can see clear as day that kids these days are not smarter than those of previous generations. We have a high dropout rate, we keep lowering standards to allow kids to pass out of "fairness" and what has it gotten us?
well, for one if you are old enough to be "married" you are old enough to have a living will, so if you dont have a living will...make one! that would end all debate on the issue
Also, instead of "marriage license" the gov could issue a "status card" that would in essence be linked to the living will, and as such work to get you those same rights in a hospital or if you become deceased.
as for your hypo, thats kind of how it is now in a divorce, you go to court and battle it out over who gets right.
I get your points, and they are all valid and should be addressed, im just saying that it would be no more difficult to fix it in a "gender neutral" way that makes it fair for everyone, regardless of their relationship status
well, for one if you are old enough to be "married" you are old enough to have a living will, so if you dont have a living will...make one! that would end all debate on the issue
Also, instead of "marriage license" the gov as for your hypo, thats kind of how it is now in a divorce, you go to court and battle it out over who gets right.
I get your points, and they are all valid and should be addressed, im just saying that it would be no more difficult to fix it in a "gender neutral" way that makes it fair for everyone, regardless of their relationship status
well, if you are FORCED to buy health care, because thats what civilized societies do... its only fair ina civilized society to mandate that people have a valid ID card
If they care "about the appearance of pleasing their voters" and they succeed, then the voters got what they want
obama is a perfect example of appearing to please his voters and, well not.
black unemployment is higher now than when he took office, he ran on helping black people get jobs
health care is more expensive for damn near everyone, he told his people it would be cheeper
I can go on and on (and the same was true of bush and previous presidents but they are not president now so they are not worth talking about in this instance)
its time to get the government out of marriage completely. there is no good reason for it to be there. if we are gonna walk down the road and claim its about "benifits" than its only fair that 2 friends who live together who are not gay should ge tthe same
they need to write the tax code to simply be about who is in the household, not "who loves who"
Slashdot Mirror
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty . . . And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
just admit you dont have a fucking clue what you are talking about. no one is advocating killing anyone. its a LAST RESORT one we hope to never have to use, but if we dont have the right to do so an no matter how many times you say we dont, you are wrong, Jefferson is right
well a constitutional convention is not quite that easy. if they tried to take away those amendments. thats where the 2nd amendment would come into play. I am willing to die for my country, I am willing to die for my friends and family. I am NOT willing to die for my government.
regardless of your interpretation of it, none of the bullshit you brought up matter. Just because it is unlikely that it will come down to that does not mean that we should change the law or the interpretation of it
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." ~Thomas Jefferson
I'll listen to what jefferson has to say on the subject over capitain dork
hey now. slashdot is VERY peer reviewed. look at all these people who dont RTFA explaining how up is down and left is right. its sound science I say!
ok. so we can have exemptions for specific things that are catastrophic. There is no good reason the text of obamacare, or no child left behind for example should not have been made public for a very long time before a vote was held
except for none of what you said matters at all in the reality of it. The 2nd amendment was written for one reason and one reason only. to keep the federal government in text. Its not ambiguous at all, its pretty clear. its 1 god damn sentence which means that the people have the right to protect themselves, from both foreign and domestic threats.
The only people who think there is wiggle room in the constitution, and the 2nd specifically are agenda driven people, people who want to disarm america so that the plutocracy can reign supreme.
how about shaming people who dont work hard? or shaming people who dont participate in civics, local or national? why would you want to shame someone for what is a basic right to self defense??
I guess we could just give everyone rape whistles and everyone will be ok though
how much policy really needs to be made? the government doesnt need to keep writing new laws all the time. I would prefer a government that only does the bare minimum, allocate spending where it needs to go (not where they want it to go) and stop coming up with half baked schemes which inevidibly make things worse
what happened to the 10th amendment??
i dont believe term limits will fix everything, but I do feel it would be a good start. while you are right about the institution needing fixing (meaning people need to stop thinking a vote for anyone who is not a D or R is a wasted vote) nothing will change. but i think with term limits you would see less and less of the establishment that we have today and things would move along a little quicker as instead of the same R or D running every 2-6 years for 50 years wont happen and fresh blood is (almost) always good
its just another example of "we have to pass it before we can find out whats in it"
Id love to see a constitutional convention in my lifetime and a few new amendments. Term limits for congress, public debate on all bills (posted in full for public consumption for at least 180 days before a vote) and no secret treaties
br> there is more, but that would be a good start
Over time, politics in the US has gotten better and voters have gotten smarter.
Explain 2 terms of bush and 2 terms of obama if that were true
simple solution. Have schools for the learning disabled and tailor the curriculum to them. There is no reason for example an illiterate 18 year old should be i nthe same English class with students without disabilities as it will only stunt their ability to learn
im not saying "kick them out" im saying work to better EVERYONE
When we leave education to the free market, children are illiterate
really? because the Dept of Ed has had a strong hold on education since the 60s and you can see clear as day that kids these days are not smarter than those of previous generations. We have a high dropout rate, we keep lowering standards to allow kids to pass out of "fairness" and what has it gotten us?
sure, and free food, free electricity, lets throw in a free car while we are at it.
Free- that word - you keep using it. I dont think it means what you think it does
all depends on what milestones matter to who is giving the talk actually. 45 years and the US is STILL the only country to have put men on the moon
thats why you have a living will, and a "status card" linked to it. you set the terms, "love" is the worst reason to do anything lol
hmm, my post got messed up. lets try this again
well, for one if you are old enough to be "married" you are old enough to have a living will, so if you dont have a living will...make one! that would end all debate on the issue
Also, instead of "marriage license" the gov could issue a "status card" that would in essence be linked to the living will, and as such work to get you those same rights in a hospital or if you become deceased.
as for your hypo, thats kind of how it is now in a divorce, you go to court and battle it out over who gets right.
I get your points, and they are all valid and should be addressed, im just saying that it would be no more difficult to fix it in a "gender neutral" way that makes it fair for everyone, regardless of their relationship status
well, for one if you are old enough to be "married" you are old enough to have a living will, so if you dont have a living will...make one! that would end all debate on the issue
Also, instead of "marriage license" the gov as for your hypo, thats kind of how it is now in a divorce, you go to court and battle it out over who gets right.
I get your points, and they are all valid and should be addressed, im just saying that it would be no more difficult to fix it in a "gender neutral" way that makes it fair for everyone, regardless of their relationship status
Who should a hospital consult if a person is incapacitated but needs a medical decision to be made: a roommate, a blood relative, or someone else?
Not that hard, family first, if no family the people you live with., next
Who inherits belongings if the decedent did not leave a will?
same as above
If the parents of a child no longer live together, should their current cohabitants be regarded as legal guardians of the child?
im not sure I follow can you elaborate, chances are my response will be the same as above
well, if you are FORCED to buy health care, because thats what civilized societies do... its only fair ina civilized society to mandate that people have a valid ID card
so... the democrats were "outraged" in 2012...yet do the same thing they were "outraged" about 2 years later???
slate and huff po... not really shocked lol
or e-machines
If they care "about the appearance of pleasing their voters" and they succeed, then the voters got what they want
obama is a perfect example of appearing to please his voters and, well not.
black unemployment is higher now than when he took office, he ran on helping black people get jobs
health care is more expensive for damn near everyone, he told his people it would be cheeper
I can go on and on (and the same was true of bush and previous presidents but they are not president now so they are not worth talking about in this instance)
its time to get the government out of marriage completely. there is no good reason for it to be there. if we are gonna walk down the road and claim its about "benifits" than its only fair that 2 friends who live together who are not gay should ge tthe same
they need to write the tax code to simply be about who is in the household, not "who loves who"
just write in kodos, you would be doing the same thing anyway