Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

The Fool Says, ‘There is no God’

Idahoser Wrote: Apr 23, 2013 12:39 PM
it's true, Athiests have the only religion that is demonstrably wrong. However it isn't wise to question your own faith too harshly, because in the end, however much you might insist otherwise, it is not possible to KNOW, in fact it's against the rules to know. You must have FAITH, and knowledge would obviate the need for faith. So you can't prove it, and you can't know it, so you're fooling yourself if you claim to KNOW. And so the argument is stupid, you only get farther from comfort (the real reason for religion) the more you try to treat religion to scientific study. Take comfort in religion. Use it as a crutch. Use it as a reason to be good if you need more than the feeling of doing good. Use it as the guideline it is.
progressive is the opposite of fair. 1. ONE rate, paid by all, no deductions, no exceptions, no exemptions. A REAL fair share. 2. No withholding. Pay your taxes on the way in to vote. 3. Every law applies to every person equally, period. No exceptions for skin color, elected status, NOTHING.
sure, if you just ignore the whole SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED part, anything is doable.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
In response to:

Gun Nuts vs. Anti-Gun Nuts II

Idahoser Wrote: Apr 01, 2013 1:48 PM
You also need to remember that the Constitution is a list of restrictions on GOVERNMENT, not on citizens. The First Amendment says CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW... The Second Amendment says "THE RIGHT... SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." See the difference? The first tells congress it can't do something. The Second says NOBODY can do something.
In response to:

Gun Nuts vs. Anti-Gun Nuts II

Idahoser Wrote: Apr 01, 2013 1:46 PM
let me clear up your confusion for you. THE RIGHT... SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. There is no such thing as a "reasonable" gun law, they are ALL unconstitutional.
In response to:

Endangered: The Constitution Part 2

Idahoser Wrote: Mar 31, 2013 8:44 AM
The Constitution is just a piece of paper. The forces which gave the ideas on that paper life, are not, as you claim, "endangered", they are extinct. The federal government was never and can never be held to it's Constitutional role simply by passing a law (the Constitution). The forces created by that document were not simply obeying orders, they were standing up for their own self interests, which were pitted against each other to make REAL balance, REAL checks on power. Removing the representation of the states was the end of that. Nothing but fear of being caught was then in the way of inevitable federal growth. If you want a Republic again, you have to put back the force that worked against runaway federal government. Repeal 17.
In response to:

Endangered: The Constitution Part 2

Idahoser Wrote: Mar 31, 2013 8:44 AM
The Constitution is just a piece of paper. The forces which gave the ideas on that paper life, are not, as you claim, "endangered", they are extinct. The federal government was never and can never be held to it's Constitutional role simply by passing a law (the Constitution). The forces created by that document were not simply obeying orders, they were standing up for their own self interests, which were pitted against each other to make REAL balance, REAL checks on power. Removing the representation of the states was the end of that. Nothing but fear of being caught was then in the way of inevitable federal growth. If you want a Republic again, you have to put back the force that worked against runaway federal government. Repeal 17.
Amen. They didn't even need the h-o-m-o-s to push them to this actually. Government stopped defending marriage ages ago, when they stopped prosecuting adultery, so they haven't had the right to tax and license it since then, at least.
In response to:

Why I’m Not a Conservative

Idahoser Wrote: Mar 18, 2013 12:14 PM
the words "conservative" and "liberal" have lost any meaning they may have had. I want the original Constitution and Bill of Rights used for it's intended purpose. If the words are not there, then you don't get to do it. I suppose if you must call me something then, I'd be a Constitutionalist.
if you want to stay poor, then no, no party should be interested in your input. You make the same mistake everybody else does, believing the lie: "... Instead, Republicans must convince the electorate that they are just as concerned about the plight of the poor and downtrodden as Progressives,..." the socialists who call themselves "progressive" are not "concerned" about the "plight" of anybody but their own elections. THERE IS NOBODY WHO CARES ABOUT YOUR PLIGHT more than you do, and that is as it should be. YOU NEED THE FREEDOM TO CORRECT YOUR SITUATION. Nobody else can or should do it for you (if you are incapacitated then your family, friends and church are there for the purpose). Charity can not be done by government.
Previous 11 - 20 Next