Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/15/2010 11:46:56 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Which, NG, I believe at one time we were.   And still are, I should think, with a little more polish and poise and other trappings than we had in the halcyon days of yore.



Yeah....just a touch more cunning....and a few more tricks.....same old objectives though....

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/15/2010 11:55:50 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Unalienable rights are the basis of all law and without it there is NO law.



I mentioned Locke as an example of how ideas follow circumstance as opposed to a set principle/set of ideas that define human existence.

You mean the concept of unalienable rights...entirely different to the existence of unalienable rights.....which has been around a few hundred years or so....while god's children have been roaming the earth for a fair bit longer.....either god was asleep for a long time or sat in a jaccuzi with a few of his angels enjoying an almighty session.....or god isn't really much of a factor in the evolution of ideas and the way we do things.

So....last time I suppose as time is ticking away.....how can the right to owning property be an unalienable right.....when said property can quite easily be taken away?...how can liberty be an unalienable right when liberty is an abstract notion that can't be defined in terms of consensus and even then I'd wager that were you to give me your definition of liberty I'd be able to give you an example of liberty (as defined by you) as being stamped out?

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/15/2010 12:34:32 PM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Ja, shove that slap happy shit up your ass, god didnt create me, my mom and dad  did (and I know how).

If you are going to use that dumbass jingle....you and your dead masturbating parrot are imbued with the same unalienable rights, and your killing him and providing a miserable life for him should send you to the electric chair.



Malice.  Contempt.

That is what this post is.   You think you are a big man.  But you do not post like a human.

I hope I never get bitter like you are.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/15/2010 12:40:33 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Unalienable rights are the basis of all law and without it there is NO law.



I mentioned Locke as an example of how ideas follow circumstance as opposed to a set principle/set of ideas that define human existence.

You mean the concept of unalienable rights...entirely different to the existence of unalienable rights.....which has been around a few hundred years or so....while god's children have been roaming the earth for a fair bit longer.....either god was asleep for a long time or sat in a jaccuzi with a few of his angels enjoying an almighty session.....or god isn't really much of a factor in the evolution of ideas and the way we do things.

So....last time I suppose as time is ticking away.....how can the right to owning property be an unalienable right.....when said property can quite easily be taken away?...how can liberty be an unalienable right when liberty is an abstract notion that can't be defined in terms of consensus and even then I'd wager that were you to give me your definition of liberty I'd be able to give you an example of liberty (as defined by you) as being stamped out?



ok locke as an example not an authority I can accept.

Well I think you need to accept that the definitions I put up here are right out of the law books not "my" definitions.

Ron is the one putting his definitions on things out here not me, I am sticking with convention.  Law dictionary definitions.

Now we can argue they differ somewhat....but for these purposes I an not sure there is a point that.

quote:

CIVIL LIBERTY civil liberty.(usu. pl.) Freedom from undue governmental interference or restraint. 
This term usu. refers to freedom of speech or religion.
In American law, early civil liberties were promulgated in the Lawes and Libertyes of Massachusetts (1648) and the Bill of Rights (1791).

In English law, examples are found in Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1628), and the Bill of Rights (1689). - Also termed civil right. [Cases: Civil Rights 1027. C.J.S. Civil Rights §§ 4-5, 8, 13.]

quote:

CLAIM OF LIBERTY claim of liberty.Hist. A petition to the Crown, filed in the Court of Exchequer, seeking the Attorney General's confirmation of liberties and franchises.




isnt it kool we both have attorney generals? Shire riefs?


ok so I am not sure where you want to take this but here is liberty for you


quote:



LIBERTY liberty. 1. Freedom from arbitrary or undue external restraint, esp. by a government <give me liberty or give me death>.2. A right, privilege, or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant; the absence of a legal duty imposed on a person <the liberties protected by the Constitution>.

[Cases: Constitutional Law 83, 254.1. C.J.S. Constitutional Law §§ 472, 511, 977-978, 980, 1418; Right to Die§ 2.]
"[Liberty] denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men." Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399, 43 S.Ct. 625, 626 (1923).

"The sphere of my legal liberty is that sphere of activity within which the law is content to leave me alone." John Salmond, Jurisprudence 239 (Glanville L. Williams ed., 10th ed. 1947).Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004) , Page 2689 2689

This part is right up your ally.... (however note there is no case law supporting just an opinion :)

"The word liberty has become a symbol around which have clung some of the most generous human emotions. We have been brought up to thrill with admiration at the men who say, Give me liberty or give me death. But the philosopher asks whether all those who are devoted to liberty mean the same thing. Does liberty or freedom, for instance, involve free trade? Does it involve freedom to preach race hatred or the overthrow of all that we regard as sacred? Many who believe in liberty characterize the freedom which they are not willing to grant, as license, and they do it so often that one may be inclined to think that what we really need is less liberty and more license.
Moreover, there is a confusion between the absence of legal restraint and the presence of real freedom as positive power to do what we want. The legal freedom to earn a million dollars is not worth a cent to one who has no real opportunity. It is fashionable to assert that men want freedom above all other things, but a strong case may be made out for the direct contrary. Absolute freedom is just what people do not want ...." Morris R. Cohen, Reason and Law 101-02 (1961).

individual liberty.See personal liberty. natural liberty.The power to act as one wishes, without any restraint or control, unless by nature.

"This natural liberty ... [is] a right inherent in us by birth .... But every man, when he enters into society, gives up a part of his natural liberty, as the price of so valuable a purchase; and, in consideration of receiving the advantages of mutual commerce, obliges himself to conform to those laws, which the community has thought proper to establish." 1 William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 121 (1765).

personal liberty.One's freedom to do as one pleases, limited only by the government's right to regulate the public health, safety, and welfare. - Also termed individual liberty. [Cases: Constitutional Law 83. C.J.S. Constitutional Law §§ 472, 511.]

political liberty.A person's freedom to participate in the operation of government, esp. in elections and in the making and administration of laws. religious


liberty.Freedom - as guaranteed by the First Amendment - to express, without external control other than one's own conscience, any or no system of religious opinion and to engage in or refrain from any form of religious observance or public or private religious worship, as long as it is consistent with the peace and order of society. [Cases: Constitutional Law 84. C.J.S. Constitutional Law §§ 513-517.]



You mean the concept of unalienable rights...entirely different to the existence of unalienable rights.....

Its not a concept but an observation.
I disagree that the unwritten should be devolved into mere concept.
Just because newton wasnt around in 1000bc does not change the fact that an apple will still hit you in the head even before it is written.


So....last time I suppose as time is ticking away.....how can the right to owning property be an unalienable right.....when said property can quite easily be taken away?...how can liberty be an unalienable right when liberty is an abstract notion that can't be defined in terms of consensus and even then I'd wager that were you to give me your definition of liberty I'd be able to give you an example of liberty (as defined by you) as being stamped out?

thou shalt not steal/covet.

if you have 5 people all starving having divided up a candy bar, 4 of whom chomped it right away and the 5th who decided to wait till he was nearly dead to eat it, when he falls asleep do the other 4 have the right to take his property?

If you have no right to a controlling interest in property then anyone can take it for any reason.

Do you own a house?  If you do I am sure you would not want someone moving in telling you so what if you paid for it with your sacrifices, blood sweat and tears we want it get out.

Oh now I see what you mean.



you are conflating unalienable right with violation of rights.

Again because someone will steal from you ar gun point does that mean you did not have the unalienable right to the property?

To say reality is that they take it from you anyway only point out the level of atrocities we have been programmed to accept and has nothing to do with the right in and of itself unless you believe that if a right is violated long enough that it should no longer be a right?






_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 6:13:55 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Again because someone will steal from you ar gun point does that mean you did not have the unalienable right to the property?



So you have an unalienable right to liberty as granted by god.....

Does this mean that someone coming along and saying: "I have an unalienable right to good health as bestowed upon me by god and while we're at it a standard of knowledge that affords me a job paying a reasonable salary"....does this mean he too has such unalienable rights? And does it mean that this boils down to whatever you think god has given you?

Presumably a standard of health and a standard of liberty are equally intrinsic to human nature or equally open to circumstance. Can you explain the difference?

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 7:09:09 AM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Again because someone will steal from you ar gun point does that mean you did not have the unalienable right to the property?



So you have an unalienable right to liberty as granted by god.....

Does this mean that someone coming along and saying: "I have an unalienable right to good health as bestowed upon me by god and while we're at it a standard of knowledge that affords me a job paying a reasonable salary"....does this mean he too has such unalienable rights? And does it mean that this boils down to whatever you think god has given you?

Presumably a standard of health and a standard of liberty are equally intrinsic to human nature or equally open to circumstance. Can you explain the difference?


unalienable means rights that cannot liened or transfered.

When you go to court and they charge you that is a lien they put against the res, you that you are compelled to respond too.

unalienable rights are another one of those words that like democracy has been so abused that there is no longer boundaries in peoples minds as to what it really is.


The best way to think of unalienable rights is like a no trespass sign.

The way you used the term you are demanding performance of another person and a right demands non-performance of another person the same as a no trespass sign would.

How that would manifest itself is that sure you have the right to good health in a context that the other person does not poison you.  Pretty much anything that creates a tort.

So it compels non-performance of others not performance.

you cant say I have the right to health and expect someone to pay for it, that is compelling performance and not a right.  It may be however a privilege granted by virtue of being a corporate member of some society and failure of providing health care would be in that case would be a breach, not a trespass.

The same thing goes for the so called right to work.  You may be a member of a body politic, a corporation who promised to take care of you.  Chattel property of another or slaves could demand fulfillment of contract the way an inmate would, in that they be fed well.  People do not know it but they actually give these guys permission to jail them.

So demanding someone else to "provide" a job or to maintain your good health or health care for you is a demand for performance not a demand for non-performance.

Examples would be:

Do not "infringe" on:

My free speech,
travel,
personal effects,
property of any sort,

all of which are a tort and require non-performance or require you to do "nothing".  

violation of unalienable rights is invariably a trespass where someone else performed where they should not have performed.

What you described is equity or or compelled performance force to do something, and force to do something "perform" is always by contract or trust.  exact opposite.








< Message edited by Real0ne -- 5/16/2010 7:41:31 AM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 7:45:02 AM   
X96X


Posts: 29
Joined: 5/15/2010
Status: offline
Real,

don't be silly.  Government makes all things possible.  HFC makes your life possible.    Obama is your daddy.  LOL.

Heil Rothschild!   lol

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 8:06:26 AM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
well gent is from the UK and its openly done that way there, here its all covert to give people they impression they have rights.  and they do BUT: The sad part about it is that you have to be a freakin new york lawyer to enjoy those rights because literally everything you sign with the guv transfers title and sticks a long list of non-disclosed implied adhesions to your butt thanks to law merchant fully adopted in 1933 when the GUV went bankrupt and the states re-presenting the people said sure we will pay those debts and gave them an open check book the result of which enjoy right now with money that isnt worth the toilet paper to wipe our asses with, patriot act and increased totalitarian police state violations, that people no longer know how to bail out of or other so entrenched in entitlements do not want to.  Guv has long become a racket.  I used to get into really kool debates with a FBI agent on one board and when I would pin her down she would always reply "Hey the government is the best business going"!  Truer words are rarely spoken.






< Message edited by Real0ne -- 5/16/2010 8:09:24 AM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to X96X)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 8:22:21 AM   
X96X


Posts: 29
Joined: 5/15/2010
Status: offline
True.  People here need to be immensely more thankful to the government.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 8:34:27 AM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: X96X

True.  People here need to be immensely more thankful to the government.


they have the misguided idea that the constitution protects them when the reality is that its their knowledge of the law that protects them. 

If hey hire an attorney they are considered a ward of the court and an infantile incapable of speaking for themselves, and that is right out of the law books. CJS.







_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to X96X)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 8:57:39 AM   
X96X


Posts: 29
Joined: 5/15/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: X96X

True.  People here need to be immensely more thankful to the government.


they have the misguided idea that the constitution protects them when the reality is that its their knowledge of the law that protects them. 

If hey hire an attorney they are considered a ward of the court and an infantile incapable of speaking for themselves, and that is right out of the law books. CJS.



If only the democrats get in-= then life will be whole.

MN needs to be greatfull to daddy Obama.  He needs to be alot more thankful that the govt has bestowed rights on him.   He is not very gracious.  HFC also must be severely thanks.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 10:09:37 AM   
FatDomDaddy


Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

No you miss the point....you said "unalienable"....you tell me what 'rights' the government can't take away from you given certain circumstances....they can jail you for a crime you didn't commit....they can intern you where you don't fit the bill...they can spy on you when they feel it's necessary....in extreme circumstances they can kill you....you wouldn't be the first to be bumped off by the secret services because you've become a high profile liability.....you ain't got the rights you seem to think you have....



One has unalienable whether they are respected by governments or not. Just because one is unable to excersise them, doesn't mean they do no have them.

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 10:51:13 AM   
X96X


Posts: 29
Joined: 5/15/2010
Status: offline
Yeah- NG- you need to be alot more appreciative of the government. 

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 11:01:44 AM   
pahunkboy


Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: X96X

True.  People here need to be immensely more thankful to the government.



I agree!!

(in reply to X96X)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 12:23:23 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

One has unalienable whether they are respected by governments or not. Just because one is unable to excersise them, doesn't mean they do no have them.



Rights? Aspirations more like.

So where are you drawing the line here......

You have a right to property so you say.....based on something inherent to man...

Does this mean you have a right to good health....based on the fact that good health is at least desirable as owning property?





_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to FatDomDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 12:41:43 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

One has unalienable whether they are respected by governments or not. Just because one is unable to excersise them, doesn't mean they do no have them.



Rights? Aspirations more like.

So where are you drawing the line here......

You have a right to property so you say.....based on something inherent to man...

Does this mean you have a right to good health....based on the fact that good health is at least desirable as owning property?







in a word?  you traverse from private to public, and I explained in great detail with examples and everything to you how it works.

I fail to understand why you repeat the same question when I gave you the law on the matter?

Claiming you have the right to health care at the expense of the public trough is no different than claiming that you have a right to be filthy wealthy at the expense of the public.  In other words again simply put you are not claiming a right.

you dont aspire not to be murdered, have your property taken away etc, you have it precisely backwards that it is you who aspires to gain health care and that as said is not a right, not a trespass, not a tort.

This is convention back to the begining of time, literally.





< Message edited by Real0ne -- 5/16/2010 12:44:02 PM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 12:49:33 PM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you dont aspire not to be murdered, have your property taken away etc, you have it precisely backwards that it is you who aspires to gain health care and that as said is not a right, not a trespass, not a tort.



Show me the difference:

Property: you aspire to own property.....you attain property through purchase.....you can have property taken away from you by human power given certain circumstances....you can have property provided by the government.

Health: you aspire to good health...you attain good health through purchase...you can have good health taken away from you by human power given certain circumstances....you can have good health provided by the government.

Yes...you provided a whole load of case notes.

What I would like to see is a clear and concise reason as to why property is different to health in this context.

< Message edited by NorthernGent -- 5/16/2010 12:51:11 PM >


_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 1:03:58 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
FR

"a right to good health"

Let's say you do. Well in that case the government has no right, nor does anyone, to poison you.

Once you get past that, you go into territory where none of us wants. Because we have a right that means the government should not take that away. But for them to be responsible to foot the bill, as a Parent would is to ask for something they simply do not owe. Once they get their proverbial foot in the door, it's over.

Anal sex should be illegal because it is more likely to spread AIDS. "Because it is more likely to tear the tissues", those are the words of an MD and ex mayor of Fairview Pk, OH, not mine. Since he was mayor, and knew of this, anal sex should have been banned in his baliwick right ? Surely he could get that through in that little conservative town. So he didn't and was derelict in his duty. But if he did he would be trampling on people's rights.

Unless you think someone should be able to smoke ten packs of smokes a day and go get a new set of lungs every couple of years, at taxpayer expense.

You just can't have it both ways.

T

< Message edited by Termyn8or -- 5/16/2010 1:07:25 PM >

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 98
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 1:25:50 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you dont aspire not to be murdered, have your property taken away etc, you have it precisely backwards that it is you who aspires to gain health care and that as said is not a right, not a trespass, not a tort.



Show me the difference:

Property: you aspire to own property.....you attain property through purchase.....you can have property taken away from you by human power given certain circumstances....you can have property provided by the government.

Health: you aspire to good health...you attain good health through purchase...you can have good health taken away from you by human power given certain circumstances....you can have good health provided by the government.

Yes...you provided a whole load of case notes.

What I would like to see is a clear and concise reason as to why property is different to health in this context.


you are hitting this from 3 directions at once.

aspire is completely the wrong premise though.
rights are not based on what you aspire too.  Besides its a verb and you cannot have hold or touch a verb much less create a tort claim.

you aspire for/to something until you are there.  Now aspire is history and today you own what you aspired to own yesterday.

Your queen has allodial property and if you do not believe it try anything you can think of in any law you can think of to take it away.  You cant dont waste your time.  The queen has the right to own that property even if its all of the UK and the only way you will get it is by conquest and the ability to hold it unto eternity from her getting it back..

So the difference in your first example is that you attain versus the government gives.  What you attain is your property and what the government gives is one of 2 things, either private property and you can use it or public property and you can use it.  Either way the difference is you either have right to ownership and disposal as you see fit or it belongs to the guv and you use it by contract.  So reducing it further one is by pure ownership and the latter is by contract.  Contract with the government that lets you use it hence what the guv gives the guv can take away.


Now while you can create an example about health its completely different and incompatible venue.  You cannot obtain a title to health care and sell it to someone else to own. 

That and health is within the confines of my skin not something external that can be severed like land a home etc.  That and the government cannot give you health.  Its impossible, all the can give you is health services which is not property you can own.  Can I stop there? do you see the difference now?



_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 99
RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? - 5/16/2010 2:58:28 PM   
FatDomDaddy


Posts: 3183
Joined: 1/31/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you dont aspire not to be murdered, have your property taken away etc, you have it precisely backwards that it is you who aspires to gain health care and that as said is not a right, not a trespass, not a tort.



Show me the difference:

Property: you aspire to own property.....you attain property through purchase.....you can have property taken away from you by human power given certain circumstances....you can have property provided by the government.

Health: you aspire to good health...you attain good health through purchase...you can have good health taken away from you by human power given certain circumstances....you can have good health provided by the government.

Yes...you provided a whole load of case notes.

What I would like to see is a clear and concise reason as to why property is different to health in this context.



Well maybe this will help... you are a being a free will... no one but yourself can take this a way from you.

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Democracy or Republic -- Which Gives Gays More Rights? Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109