Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Bubba Ho-Tep; OIFVeteran; jeffersondem; DiogenesLamp; rockrr; DoodleDawg; Bull Snipe

>>Bubba Ho-Tep wrote: “No, YOU imply that. The law says no such thing. In fact, the law draws a distinction between the two. It could have said, “Any person who served in the armed forces of either side during the Civil War shall be considered a United States veteran.” But it doesn’t. It says confederate veterans shall get the same pension as United States veterans. It’s saying, “here are two groups, and they get the same thing,” not, “here is one group.”

You can claim what you want to claim, but that doesn’t make it Law. The Law states what I have expressed.

No more opinions, please. Show us clearly in the Law why Confederate military veterans are NOT U.S. military veterans, and I will concede.

Mr. Kalamata


1,254 posted on 01/29/2020 6:56:44 PM PST by Kalamata (BIBLE RESEARCH TOOLS: http://bibleresearchtools.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1252 | View Replies ]


To: Kalamata
No more opinions, please. Show us clearly in the Law why Confederate military veterans are NOT U.S. military veterans, and I will concede.

Because the law clearly distinguishes between the two, saying only that they will receive the same treatment. If the law says that all dog owners will receive the same treatment as if they were cat owners, it doesn't mean that all dog owners are now officially cat owners. If they'd intended to say that all confederate veterans were now to be legally considered United States veterans, they could have said so. Instead they simply said they'd receive the same pension.

1,268 posted on 01/30/2020 9:51:13 AM PST by Bubba Ho-Tep ("The rat always knows when he's in with weasels."--Tom Waits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1254 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson