You’ve completely mischaracterized what I’m arguing. I’m saying that because you draw a line somewhere, it means that drawing a line is not itself disqualifying.
But when this all started, you claimed that because Romney DREW a line, he was disqualified.
What you really are complaining about is simply WHERE he drew the line. But you have offered NO argument as to why where YOU draw the line is correct, and where HE draws the line is incorrect.
The militia, the right to bear arms, the whole topic of guns is covered only a few times in the entire set of the federalist papers. You can keep claiming different, but since the document exists online, you will lose that argument.
Go search for the words “militia” or arms” or “armed” in the online federalist papers, you will find fewer than 10 references that are germaine to our conversation. The issue was important, but not a big subject of contention they had to spend pages on, like some other more controversial topics. As the federalist papers were attempting to convince people to support the constitution, they spent a lot more time on things that were controversial.
Let’s turn it around. What in the constitution or the federalist papers makes you think the founders would ban suitcase nukes, or machine guns?
Here's what I said: "This is the same argument leftist gun-grabbers use (to be clear, I am *not* calling you a leftist gun-grabber -- just observing that you are using their argument). By this argument, logically we should only be permitted to own arms that existed during Revolutionary times. It's specious. The Founders were no fools. The answers to your questions lie in the Federalist Papers."
And that's what I'm still saying. I've said repeatedly that the rights Romney wants to infringe upon with the AWB clearly fall under rights that the Founders considered God-given rights. I pointed you to the support of my argument, the Federalist papers.
Now in order to bolster your argument, you claim I began this discussion with an assertion I never made! There's no point in going around in circles. As I said before, our stances are too far apart for reasonable discussion purposes. Good night.