*SlappinAzz*
Shoot em
I don't believe in god at all. We evolved from science. In this world, man is god.
For those who want to argue about politics...
- Thread starter bunkerking09
- Live activity
- Replies 47
- Views 551
RAM_Designs
5,000+ posts
SketchUp Master
That's deep bro, pass the ganja.
So you still think that blacks are only worth 3/5 of a white person? You're against having an Air Force I'm sure?
*SlappinAzz*
Shoot em
inhale and exhale, homes
RAM_Designs
5,000+ posts
SketchUp Master
I just exhale, cool cats like myself and Clinton don't inhale.
AlterEgo99
5,000+ posts
Streaming consciousness
I'm only against you still breathing... //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/*******.gif.a649d21efc0d1fd4890a6428166586c1.gif
There are things called amendments...I'm OK with those fuckface.
What I don't go for is a federal gov't that completely ignores the Constitution, which ours has now for many, many years...or a Supreme Court that finds "rights" within the same document where there are none (Roe v. Wade for example).
Now stfu and gtfo you penis sucking pussy ass moonbat.
audioholic
5,000+ posts
not a moderator
God is simply everything science has not yet defined. This has been proven time and time again.
Do you disagree that the federal courts should interpret the meaning of the Constitution, or just with some of their decisions? Kind of hard to tell from what you've posted.
audioholic
5,000+ posts
not a moderator
I suspect he means a govt who will sidestep its own rules to do whatever is necessary to fulfill an agenda. The marijuana tax stamp law (and the submachine gun tax stamp) would be a perfect example. Applying excessive taxes to politically incorrect things they cannot lawfully illegalize, like cigarettes, would be another example.
Your choice of the Marijuana tax stamp act is an interesting one, as it was originally pushed by moneyed industrial interests who sought to suppress the marijuana trade not on health or "political correctness" grounds (although it was portrayed as such by the legislators whom the industrialists had paid to support it), but because hemp was an inexpensive alternative to their products; newsprint and nylon, and threatened their continued profitability. Over time it morphed into a criminal act, and was ruled unconstitutional because anyone seeking a license to sell marijuana had to incriminate themselves in an attempt to get one. Congress eventually repealed and replaced it with the Controlled Substances Act, which directly illegalized marijuana.
In other words, it was not a renegade legislature than dreamed up the Act, it was the corrupting influence of private interests, exercising their "free speech" rights guaranteed them by the Bill of Rights, and perhaps as most recently reinforced in the Citizens United decision, which could arguably (and probably more correctly) be viewed as one fulfilling a political agenda.
In other words, it was not a renegade legislature than dreamed up the Act, it was the corrupting influence of private interests, exercising their "free speech" rights guaranteed them by the Bill of Rights, and perhaps as most recently reinforced in the Citizens United decision, which could arguably (and probably more correctly) be viewed as one fulfilling a political agenda.
Cabin_Pressure
10+ year member
yeah, it'll do
You're a retarded troll.....................IMHO.
AlterEgo99
5,000+ posts
Streaming consciousness
Yes.
So, in the example of the marijuana tax stamp act, how do you reconcile your distaste for the act while still supporting the type of people who made it happen?
AlterEgo99
5,000+ posts
Streaming consciousness
No and no.
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
About this thread
