gun control = enslavement

Threedee said:
Well, in theory, liberty is worth dying for
Click to expand...
Not just in theory. Try living without it some day.

BTW, the actual sentiment is, Liberty is worth risking your life for. And when people risk their lives, some of them die - a necessary consequence of fighting for something that is worth risking your life for.

this is 2008 and Americans wouldn't know what sacrifice was if it bit them in the ass.
Click to expand...
Americans would. You'll find quite a few of them signing up for harsh, unpleasant, often revolting "work" in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea, etc.

Those Americans at least (and possibly many others) do know what sacrifice is, because they voluntarily made it part of their lives. And many of them keep re-signing-up even after getting a big dose of it.

Americans WOULD know what sacrifice is. Liberals wouldn't - not the ones who keep saying we aren't getting enough benefit from being in the aforementioned places.
 
Watermark said:
Fucking gun nuts value property more than life. I hope they all kill each other so we can turn this nation right.
Click to expand...
YOu know I am so tired of your gun fraidy cat bullshit you twit. I have repeatedly posted stats that show guns are used far more for defense than for murder or even when they are involved in ANY kind of death and when I do I find you to be absolutely absent in your replies. You keep claiming that guns are so fucking dangerous back it up. SHOW US that they are more dangerous than they are beneficial. I have challenged you to do so over and over and you fade away every time.
 
Little-Acorn said:
Not just in theory. Try living without it some day.

BTW, the actual sentiment is, Liberty is worth risking your life for. And when people risk their lives, some of them die - a necessary consequence of fighting for something that is worth risking your life for.


Americans would. You'll find quite a few of them signing up for harsh, unpleasant, often revolting "work" in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea, etc.

Those Americans at least (and possibly many others) do know what sacrifice is, because they voluntarily made it part of their lives. And many of them keep re-signing-up even after getting a big dose of it.

Americans WOULD know what sacrifice is. Liberals wouldn't - not the ones who keep saying we aren't getting enough benefit from being in the aforementioned places.
Click to expand...

Well in my theory, you're a moron.
 
When Patrick Henry used the line in his speech it was the last line of the speech that is repeated.

The rest of the speech is often left unread and unstated. They don't realize when it was said, or how it was used.

Virginia was very close to voting against revolution, and given how close the US was to not becoming a nation it likely would have ensured a British victory. Speech after speech before the vote was made in favor of remaining loyal to the crown, the last given that night was Patrick Henry's in opposition to that idea. He addressed his speech to the President of the Convention, as according to rules of order it was custom to do so. I will post the entirety of the speech. Just the other night, at a Lincoln day dinner I heard it given from memory by Bob Shaffer, my former Congressman and likely to be the next Senator of Colorado.

St. John's Church, Richmond, Virginia
March 23, 1775.

MR. PRESIDENT: No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do, opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely, and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfil the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offence, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves, and the House? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these war-like preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled, that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask, gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done, to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free² if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending²if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable²and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace²but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Click to expand...

After the speech the Virginia Convention voted in favor of Revolution.
 
Watermark said:
LOL, next time a Republican plans to invade a random nation I'm definitely pinning this speech on you.
Click to expand...
Yo ijit, this was a speech given on the eve of going to war for OUR FREEDOM. I would not expect you to be able to tell the difference but older wiser people should be able to.
 
Socrtease said:
Yo ijit, this was a speech given on the eve of going to war for OUR FREEDOM. I would not expect you to be able to tell the difference but older wiser people should be able to.
Click to expand...

1. If America hadn't rebelled, we'd be living in Britian right now, which wouldn't be so bad.

2. You said "ZOMG IF I HEAR A SPEECH LIKE THAT I WOULD TOTALLY GO TO WAR". And you would. Ignorant fools like you care more about speeches and pretty words than reality. If a speech like this was said about anything you'd go along.
 
Watermark said:
1. If America hadn't rebelled, we'd be living in Britian right now, which wouldn't be so bad.

2. You said "ZOMG IF I HEAR A SPEECH LIKE THAT I WOULD TOTALLY GO TO WAR". And you would. Ignorant fools like you care more about speeches and pretty words than reality. If a speech like this was said about anything you'd go along.
Click to expand...
If America hadn't rebelled it is unlikely Britain would have changed in quite the way that they went.
 
Watermark said:
Yeah, they'd be about 10 times bigger right now.
Click to expand...
America took the lead in Democracy, it is pretense to suggest otherwise. Without the change brought on by the US, Britain's government would like look very different.

As for we'd be part of Britain, is Canada? They remained loyal.
 
Damocles said:
America took the lead in Democracy, it is pretense to suggest otherwise. Without the change brought on by the US, Britain's government would like look very different.

As for we'd be part of Britain, is Canada? They remained loyal.
Click to expand...

You know damo, It's annoying when you get all serious on me.
 
Watermark said:
1. If America hadn't rebelled, we'd be living in Britian right now, which wouldn't be so bad.

2. You said "ZOMG IF I HEAR A SPEECH LIKE THAT I WOULD TOTALLY GO TO WAR". And you would. Ignorant fools like you care more about speeches and pretty words than reality. If a speech like this was said about anything you'd go along.
Click to expand...

With point number two, you sound like someone who voted and caucused for Hillary. :clink:
 
Threedee said:
Aha! That contemporary mentality I was speaking of! :hand:
Click to expand...

I specialise in contemporary mentality. Since everyone is pissing on Ben Franklin's views about liberty and security I thought I'd get contemporary.

I rather like it. It's quite liberating. I hope it isn't post-modern, post-modernism gives me the absolute shits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top