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

To: Non-Sequitur
So? They belonged to the federal government. The South had no legal rights to them, or any of the other federal property they had stolen.

Your theory is that the People have no rights at all.

Only the Government has "rights". The People are always wrong, and need to be talked down to by the voice of command.

Step up to the bar, then, treat us all to another round of barrel-proof statism.

554 posted on 02/27/2010 3:49:26 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies ]


To: lentulusgracchus
Your theory is that the People have no rights at all.

No, it's your theory that some people have no rights at all and other people have all the rights at the expense of the have nots. And how you manage to conclude that the Constitution supports something like that is mystery. On the other hand, giving your odd theories, maybe not.

Only the Government has "rights". The People are always wrong, and need to be talked down to by the voice of command.

OK it you want to take it to your levels, what gave the 7 rebelling Southern states the right to steal property that properly belonged to all the states jointly? I keep forgetting, in your world only the rebelling states had rights. The remaining states had none.

Step up to the bar, then, treat us all to another round of barrel-proof statism.

Liquor might explain a lot of your posts.

568 posted on 02/28/2010 4:44:26 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies ]

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