Free Country, Really?

[Jarod]

"RIGHTS" have no adverse affects on anybody ever because "RIGHTS" never violate anybody else's rights. Violations of other people's rights are NOT rights, they're violations of rights.

No, you are being simpleminded.

You have a right to make your own medical decisions, but I suspect you are in favor of abortion being illegal, right?
Well is that not a violation of a woman's right to make her own medical decisions?

You have a right to bear arms, but when someone is convicted of a felony, they lose that right. Do you disagree with that, should they be free to bear arms in their prison cell?

I have a right to free speech, but does that mean I can scream outside your window all night long?

 

[Robo]

no, and I never said that.

Id rather 9 judges, separated from politics, not answerable to the masses for job security, appointed by an elected president and approved by the Congress defining the rights, defining that line than just about any other system that has yet to be dreamed up.

Well then, since voting in the duopoly's rigged elections only produces biased partisan ideological judges, then maybe you're only real option is to get behind a promotion for a Constitutional Convention to reform the election system and restore the Constitution, don't you think?

 

[Robo]

No, you are being simpleminded.

Explain please what you find to be “simpleminded” about what I said. It’s the “simple-truth.”

You have a right to make your own medical decisions, but I suspect you are in favor of abortion being illegal, right?
Well is that not a violation of a woman's right to make her own medical decisions?

Your suspicions are unfounded shoot-from-the-hip ignorance. I “personally” am pro-life, but politically pro-choice. I’ll remain that way until the Constitution is amended, if ever, to include constitutional protections for the unborn.

You have a right to bear arms, but when someone is convicted of a felony, they lose that right. Do you disagree with that, should they be free to bear arms in their prison cell?

“Neither slavery or involuntary servitude, EXCEPT AS A PUNISHMENT FOR A CRIME whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” (Amendment 13, United States Constitution)

Involuntary servitude as justified by the 13th amendment is the legal constitutional relinquishing of ones rights.

I have a right to free speech, but does that mean I can scream outside your window all night long?

I’d have you arrested for VIOLATING my LIBERTY to get a peaceful night’s sleep.

 

[kaz]

Are American citizens really ”FREE?”

Should American citizens be free to do whatever they want as long as they don’t violate anybody else’s rights to life, liberty, or property?

Do American citizens own their own bodies? Should they be free to own their own bodies?

Does government own your body? Should government own your body?

Conceptually I agree with you, but what does owning our bodies mean to you? Maybe you could be a little more specific. Are you referring to negative rights, which I agree with? Liberals would agree with your statement, but then support positive rights which clearly violate the concept of being protected from others, but they don't get that

 

[Jarod]

Well then, since voting in the duopoly's rigged elections only produces biased partisan ideological judges, then maybe you're only real option is to get behind a promotion for a Constitutional Convention to reform the election system and restore the Constitution, don't you think?

I think we have, on balance, pretty good justices. They are fairly blind to politics and practicality and base the rulings on the balance that the Constitution requires. Most of the time.

 

[kaz]

no, and I never said that.

Id rather 9 judges, separated from politics, not answerable to the masses for job security, appointed by an elected president and approved by the Congress defining the rights, defining that line than just about any other system that has yet to be dreamed up.

An unaccountable dictatorship works for you, does it? The Supreme Court repeatedly trods on our rights. The primary check and balance needs to be between States and the Federal government, not between branches of the same Federal government which obviously isn't working as the Supreme Court thinks we have no rights other than to get an abortion and curse on TV

 

[Jarod]

I’d have you arrested for VIOLATING my LIBERTY to get a peaceful night’s sleep.

But what about my right to free speech? I thought you believed it was absolute!

 

[Jarod]

An unaccountable dictatorship works for you, does it? The Supreme Court repeatedly trods on our rights. The primary check and balance needs to be between States and the Federal government, not between branches of the same Federal government which obviously isn't working as the Supreme Court thinks we have no rights other than to get an abortion and curse on TV

Example of the Supreme Court repeatedly troding on our rights?

 

[Jarod]

An unaccountable dictatorship works for you, does it? The Supreme Court repeatedly trods on our rights. The primary check and balance needs to be between States and the Federal government, not between branches of the same Federal government which obviously isn't working as the Supreme Court thinks we have no rights other than to get an abortion and curse on TV

You have the right to marry who you chose.
You have the right to be reasonably free from unreasonable governmental interference.
You have the right to bear arms.
You have the right to free speech.
You have the right to basic freedom until that freedom unreasonably interferes with the RIGHTS of another.

Give me an example of where you don't have those rights/freedoms?

 

[kaz]

I think we have, on balance, pretty good justices. They are fairly blind to politics and practicality and base the rulings on the balance that the Constitution requires. Most of the time.

Please. They decided government controlling our healthcare is a "tax," government can confiscate money for it's own interest rather than the common good (New London), they made up a right to an abortion, decided government can regulate free speech heading into elections, think intrastate commerce is interstate commerce, think government can discriminate between it's citizens, think government can redistribute money between citizens when there is no Constitutional authority to do that, think government can engage in non-defensive wars.

The Supreme Court is a joke if you care about the Constitution, and not a funny one

 

[Jarod]

Please. They decided government controlling our healthcare is a "tax," government can confiscate money for it's own interest rather than the common good (New London), they made up a right to an abortion, decided government can regulate free speech heading into elections, think intrastate commerce is interstate commerce, think government can discriminate between it's citizens, think government can redistribute money between citizens when there is no Constitutional authority to do that, think government can engage in non-defensive wars.

The Supreme Court is a joke if you care about the Constitution, and not a funny one

You can still control your healthcare. Where does the Constitution say the Government cant tax? Its not a right to abortion, its a right to control your healthcare that includes abortion. How does the government regulate free speech heading into elections?

You have yet to name a right that the Supreme Court has taken from you.

I understand you might not like the way others express their freedoms and rights, but that's part of participating in a free nation.

 

[Jarod]

Just this year the Supreme Court found more freedom for Americans.

Before this year you were only free to marry about 50% of the adult population.... not you are free to marry almost 100% of the adult population.

 

[Robo]

Conceptually I agree with you, but what does owning our bodies mean to you? Maybe you could be a little more specific. Are you referring to negative rights, which I agree with? Liberals would agree with your statement, but then support positive rights which clearly violate the concept of being protected from others, but they don't get that

All rights are "positive."

 

[Robo]

I think we have, on balance, pretty good justices. They are fairly blind to politics and practicality and base the rulings on the balance that the Constitution requires. Most of the time.

Surrrrrrrre we dooooooo! You're joking, right? The politicians and the courts are the reason we have 20 trillion dollars national debt and rising. They're the reason we have a federal government that feeds taxpayer's money at the hog trough to every special interest in the country to bribe their campaign contributions and votes, unconstitutional social programs corporate and social welfare none of which authorized by the Constitution. The Patriot Act and Undeclared wars up the ass.

 

[Jarod]

Surrrrrrrre we dooooooo! You're joking, right? The politicians and the courts are the reason we have 20 trillion dollars national debt and rising. They're the reason we have a federal government that feeds taxpayer's money at the hog trough to every special interest in the country to bribe their campaign contributions and votes, unconstitutional social programs corporate and social welfare none of which authorized by the Constitution. The Patriot Act and Undeclared wars up the ass.

So you are confusing rights with fiscal policy and foreign affairs.

Are you aware that income taxes are almost as low as they have ever been?

I am against the undeclared wars, just like the president. Trump is promoting more of em.

What particular thing about the revised patriot act (Republican written and passed) are you upset by?

 

[Robo]

But what about my right to free speech? I thought you believed it was absolute!

The alleged "free speech" you claimed, wasn't a "right" because it violated my right to my "LIBERTY" to get a good night's sleep. There's no such thing as a right that violates a right. Any act that violates a right is not a right, it's a violation of a right. You have no right to keep me from my sleep, but I have the right to sleep. Every sane and honest person knows that. Why do you have a problem with it?

 

[Robo]

You have the right to marry who you chose.

Not until 2015.

You have the right to be reasonably free from unreasonable governmental interference.

You’re kiddin right? Yeah, like the NSA collecting our phone calls, e-mails and any other electronic communications we use, and they do it without a warrant. They tell us how much water we can have in our toilets and what we can and cannot put into our own bodies.

You have the right to bear arms.

Bullshit! Only in the “Open Carry” States. In New Jersey, any firearm in an automobile must be unloaded and in a separate compartment in the car from any ammunition. Does that sound like a right to “bear” arms?

You have the right to free speech.

Bullshit! The Courts say you can’t shout “fire” in a theater even if it’s on fire.

You have the right to basic freedom until that freedom unreasonably interferes with the RIGHTS of another.

HOW “BASIC?” Like anything that the government hasn’t yet thought about regulating? What might that be?

Give me an example of where you don't have those rights/freedoms?

Just DID!!!!!

 

[Jarod]

The alleged "free speech" you claimed, wasn't a "right" because it violated my right to my "LIBERTY" to get a good night's sleep. There's no such thing as a right that violates a right. Any act that violates a right is not a right, it's a violation of a right. You have no right to keep me from my sleep, but I have the right to sleep. Every sane and honest person knows that. Why do you have a problem with it?

Well, that is not how 200 years of the supreme court have seen it, according to them they are both rights that must be balanced.

 

[Robo]

Just this year the Supreme Court found more freedom for Americans.

Before this year you were only free to marry about 50% of the adult population.... not you are free to marry almost 100% of the adult population.

Just recently John Roberts and Barrack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and a Democrat controlled Congress took away every American citizen's right to "NOT" have health insurance without government punishment. They stole every adult citizen's right to decide his/her own healthcare rights of individual decision and action.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

If you live in a low population area, your rights are much less likely to affect those of others, you have more freedom.

If you want to randomly shoot off your bazooka, and you are the only one around for miles... okay with me.

If you live in a city with thousands of people within a mile, you have less freedom.

what part, specifically, in the US constitution does it state that large population areas require people to have less rights? please, be VERY specific.