Obama's move on same-sex marriage is 'very rare,' WFU law professor says

Rana said:
No, they are not, how many gay marriages have killed innocent people?
Click to expand...

yes, they are completely irrelevant in the face of constitutional rights.

it also might shock you to know that the only two acknowledged murders by legal machineguns in this country occurred at the hands of police officers.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
yes, they are completely irrelevant in the face of constitutional rights.

it also might shock you to know that the only two acknowledged murders by legal machineguns in this country occurred at the hands of police officers.
Click to expand...

and the laws help in keeping the number this low. emotions are involved in all decisions, even the writing of the Constitution, it was the hate of all things King George which drove the writers. Emotions are tied to everything! and need to be.
 
Rana said:
and the laws help in keeping the number this low.
Click to expand...
how much about the NFA registry do you really know?

Rana said:
emotions are involved in all decisions, even the writing of the Constitution, it was the hate of all things King George which drove the writers. Emotions are tied to everything! and need to be.
Click to expand...

the emotions were in having their rights denied or violated. the emotions were about protecting ALL of their rights, ALL of the time.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
how much about the NFA registry do you really know?



the emotions were in having their rights denied or violated. the emotions were about protecting ALL of their rights, ALL of the time.
Click to expand...

No, they denied woman and blacks their rights, so the Fathers weren't perfect and neither is the Constitution, but it is a good building block!
 
Rana said:
No, they denied woman and blacks their rights, so the Fathers weren't perfect and neither is the Constitution, but it is a good building block!
Click to expand...

a building block to further protect rights, yes. That's not what liberals and conservatives have been trying to do to it for over 100 years.

and you didn't answer the question about the NFA
 
SmarterThanYou said:
a building block to further protect rights, yes. That's not what liberals and conservatives have been trying to do to it for over 100 years.

and you didn't answer the question about the NFA
Click to expand...

Oh, sorry, no I don't know that much about the NFA, but I do know I don't want everyone purchasing machine guns, I don't share your ideas on this, sorry. I see your point, but I just HATE guns and I know it isn't the guns, and it is the people, but it just makes me feel better for it to be harder for people to obtain them.
 
Rana said:
Oh, sorry, no I don't know that much about the NFA, but I do know I don't want everyone purchasing machine guns, I don't share your ideas on this, sorry. I see your point, but I just HATE guns and I know it isn't the guns, and it is the people, but it just makes me feel better for it to be harder for people to obtain them.
Click to expand...

so you admit that you think the constitution should only protect rights YOU think are important.
 
Rana said:
No, I am just telling you my feeling about guns and why I think it is better for people not to be able to buy machine guns.
Click to expand...

but if the right to bear arms is to protect against federal tyranny, would it not make sense then to have machine guns be available to the people?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top