Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Bill of No Rights - (comical; but 90% true! "Article VIII" is questionable, as it is phrased)
JUNTO SOCIETY.COM ^ | JUNE 16, 2005 | LEWIS NAPPER

Posted on 06/17/2005 4:04:58 PM PDT by CHARLITE

We, the sensible of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid any further idiocy, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great grandchildren, hereby try one more time to obtain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden delusional, and other stupid bedwetters. We hold these truths to be self-evident that a whole lot of people were confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim that they require a Bill of No Rights.

ARTICLE I

You do not have the right to a new car, big-screen color TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II

You do not have the right to never be offended. The country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone - not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc., But the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

ARTICLE III

You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all of your relatives independently wealthy.

ARTICLE IV

You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

ARTICLE V

You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI

You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and kill you.

ARTICLE VII

You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in place where you still won't have the right to a big-screen color TV.

ARTICLE VIII

You do not have the right to demand that our children risk their lives in foreign wars to soothe your aching conscience. We hate oppressive governments and won't lift a finger to stop you from going to fight if you'd like. However, we do not enjoy parenting the entire world and do not want to spend so much of our time battling each and every little tyrant with a military uniform and a funny hat.

ARTICLE IX

You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have one, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities in education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

ARTICLE X

You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to pursue happiness - which, by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiot laws created by those around you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: billof; education; happiness; healthcare; jobs; rights; wars

1 posted on 06/17/2005 4:04:59 PM PDT by CHARLITE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

I have this somewhere at home...it was written well before 9/11, so perhaps a revision is in order, unless there is a revised version out there I don't know about.

I believe we shouldn't participate in conflicts in all these pissant countries, but yes, it is necessary for our safety and security to protect the U.S. by thrashing the terrorists as much as possible.

And maybe include something about protecting our borders too?

All in all, though, the Bill of No Rights is still a good piece of work.


2 posted on 06/17/2005 4:10:40 PM PDT by fatnotlazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

There is nothing wrong with article VIII.

It just states that we wont fight the worlds battles when they arent in our interest.

Loved the post


3 posted on 06/17/2005 4:17:47 PM PDT by mylife (The roar of the masses could be farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

sounds good to me


4 posted on 06/17/2005 4:18:40 PM PDT by kanecorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy

I have saved this and emailed to a couple of people.


5 posted on 06/17/2005 4:21:04 PM PDT by Rhiannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

Article VIII is questionable because we do not send anyone's "children" to fight in foreign wars. They are adults, and they volunteered to serve in the military.


6 posted on 06/17/2005 4:22:14 PM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

LOL!


7 posted on 06/17/2005 4:22:40 PM PDT by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE
You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care

Public health care and free health care are two different things..."public" usually just means someone else (i.e. the taxpayer) is paying...and that usually results in the service being, not free, but damn expensive

8 posted on 06/17/2005 4:24:06 PM PDT by Irontank (Let them revere nothing but religion, morality and liberty -- John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

Hey, we could call it the BoNR!


9 posted on 06/17/2005 4:28:45 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Disregard the law of unintended consequences at your own risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking

Hehe


10 posted on 06/17/2005 4:30:39 PM PDT by mylife (The roar of the masses could be farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: fatnotlazy
I believe we shouldn't participate in conflicts in all these pissant countries, but yes, it is necessary for our safety and security to protect the U.S. by thrashing the terrorists as much as possible.

It is a conflict. Do we wait for those who hate us to come here and kill our women, children and the innocent in our streets, or do we take the appropriate violence to our enemies home? If it's for political reasons, as in LBJ and Vietnam, no. If it's for strategic reasons, as in GWB and Af/Raq, yes.

A further test. The reason that Clinton did not react properly to Al Qeada was a political decision, not strategic. The reason Reagan got up from the negotiation table with Gorbachov was strategic. Democrats can pronounce strategic, but they don't know what it is. Strategy is beyond their ken, cheating is not.

Bush can't say strategic but he and/or those around him, really know what it means.

11 posted on 06/17/2005 4:34:53 PM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #12 Removed by Moderator

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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