Posted on 10/09/2014 12:49:58 PM PDT by servo1969
ABC’s Scandal, which has a fresh episode tonight, last week featured “President Fitzgerald Grant,” supposedly a Republican, channeling Piers Morgan as he used the State of the Union address to plead for more gun control: “How many other people’s children are we going to let die before we put a stop to this?”
“Grant,” played by Tony Goldwyn, recalled how his teen son died of a “fluke” infection (not true, that’s one of many of Scandal’s wild conspiracies), but “there were thousands of people last year who lost their lives in a completely avoidable way.”
He then compared gun rights with slavery: “The right to bear arms -- set in stone in the Constitution by our founding fathers. So was slavery, by the way.”
By that logic, you could say: “The right to free speech -- set in stone in the Constitution by our founding fathers. So was slavery, by the way.”
should not be leaving abortion off
“Constitutional Scholar”. Har har har.
Interesting meme here. The Left is preparing their agenda for a COS.
[ By my memory (which is usually far better than liberal script-writers’ produced product):
Slavery was mentioned in the Constitution as part of the “Three-Fifths Compromise” (which was done to lessen the power of slave-holding states, but never “set” as a right that was not to be infringed upon.
What a bunch of dumb-asses. And this got past how many network script approval stages, to make it out onto the airwaves?!? ]
Give these liberal fools a time machine and the ability to edit the constitution and slaves would have been counted as full humans in terms of house apportionment and the south would have cannonized slavery in so many laws we would still have it to this day...
What did they think that the slaves would be allowed to vote for anyone besides who their masters told themt o vote for....???
Damned liberal fools!
If I had made the graphic I would have included it.
Nothing in the Bill of Rights gives anyone any rights whatsoever.
"Contrary to popular opinion the Constitution was not and is not a grant of rights to the citizenry. Instead, the Constitution is a "barbed-wire entanglement" designed to interfere with, restrict, and impede government officials in the exercise of political power."
- - Jacob Hornberger
We are in dire need of gun control reform people. Gun control means no politician, bureaucrat, or DC lawyer be allowed to have guns in their possession nor are their bodyguards allowed same. This is the reform most needed in politics. Please spread the word.
So is the presidency, so is the pinhead trying to say even that is up for grabs to get rid of? I am ALL for it!
“Where is that slavery clause again?”
The bill of rights apparently, otherwise the argument is pathetic and juvenile.
Slavery was never a part of the Bill of Rights. The Constitution did protect slave owners rights (as property rights). It also protected slavery by prohibiting free states from setting escaped slaves free - but, there was no “right to own slaves”.
The Constitution did limit slave states from counting slaves a “full persons” (the 3/5’s rule) in their population count in regard to the number of representatives they were allowed to have. Other than that, again, slavery was never given a “right” status like the right to own a firearm. The writers of that idiot show either don’t know the difference, or worse, they intentionally mislead and appeal to the low-info crowd with this sludge.
It wasn’t added until the 16th Amendment where the government effectively said that it owned 100% of your income.
Right after the "muskets" clause...
.
No part of the bill of rights was part of the original constitution. The bill of rights are all amendments to the constitution.
Hence the comparison is an epic fail.
Geez! Honest to gawd you can’t make this stuff up!!
Time for the face in hand pic.
re: “Nothing in the Bill of Rights gives anyone any rights whatsoever.”
True, but it did expressly name the rights that were to be protected from intrusion by the federal government. I think we all understand that, but it never hurts to point it out. So, thanks, and your excellent point taken.
Nope, never mentioned until the Republicans in 1865 managed to get enough Democrats in the rump Congress to go along and gain the 2/3 vote necessary to pass an amendment outlawing it. The original provision allowing for 3/5 representation of people in servitude (slave population, basically) was in there at the insistence of the southern States to boost their numbers in Congress and give them sufficient power, in spite of their smaller populations, to circumvent the power in the House of the more populous northern States. But “Slavery”, as such, is never mentioned. So once again this supposed “Constitutional Scholar” is shown to be, as in so many other respects, a complete and utter fraud.
Goes with rights are endowed by our Creator. Am I correct?
False, but a great sound bite for the campaign trail.
How does everyone find out about this stuff? It is not even on until tonight at 9. Spoilers should be banned until 24 hours after viewers have the opportunity to watch.
NP. Not trying to be a nit picker but....oh just call it one of those things that grates on my optic nerve when I see it. I must learn to walk away from the keyboard at those times. =;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.