Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Steele Slips Again, But America Should not Fall for it - ALAN KEYES challenges Steele to debate!
America's Independent Party ^ | Friday, March 13, 2009 | Alan Keyes

Posted on 03/13/2009 1:32:40 PM PDT by EternalVigilance

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 261-269 next last
To: EternalVigilance
1. he at least tried to maintain a semblence of adherence to the clear requirement of the Constitution

2. He didn’t adhere to the requirement of the Constitution, and I never claimed he did.

Bill Clinton couldn't have said it better.

181 posted on 03/13/2009 9:30:24 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
State laws were the sole protection of the rights of the unborn

Until they started slaughtering them, and calling it "legal." Rebellion against morality and God and the natural law always lead to the loss of liberty. What do you expect?

182 posted on 03/13/2009 9:31:22 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

I’m sorry your reading comprehension skills don’t extend to understanding the distinct difference between “semblence” and “reality.”


183 posted on 03/13/2009 9:33:03 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Until they started slaughtering them

At the behest of Blackmun, his kind and their apologists.

184 posted on 03/13/2009 9:34:05 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

The slaughter started in the states. That’s why it ended up in the Supreme Court..


185 posted on 03/13/2009 9:36:32 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
I simply pointed out that he at least tried to maintain a semblence of adherence to the clear requirement of the Constitution

Busted.

186 posted on 03/13/2009 9:36:53 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
That’s why it ended up in the Supreme Court..

Backwards. Norma McCorvey went to court because the state laws impeded her own personal slaughter.

You'll say anything, won't you?

187 posted on 03/13/2009 9:39:38 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

The proper response to the state rebellion against rights was Judge Adrian Burke’s, as I posted in #171.

If his views, which are identical to my views, had prevailed, fifty million Americans would be walking around right now instead of having been mercilessly slaughtered.

If your views prevailed, we could just start the whole sorry process over again.


188 posted on 03/13/2009 9:40:52 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Again, you don’t understand the finer distinctions of language, obviously. “Semblence” means “looks like,” not “is.”


189 posted on 03/13/2009 9:42:29 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

If you think the Supreme Court would have accepted Roe and agreed to hear it apart from the rash of state laws “legalizing” abortion, you don’t know much about the political nature of the Court.


190 posted on 03/13/2009 9:45:04 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
If his views, which are identical to my views, had prevailed, fifty million Americans would be walking around right now instead of having been mercilessly slaughtered.

Nonsense. Blackmun and his ilk abrogated state law. State laws restricting abortion have been voided by the misrepresentations of the 14th Amendment that you have been championing.

191 posted on 03/13/2009 9:45:43 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
I simply pointed out that he at least tried to maintain a semblence of adherence to the clear requirement of the Constitution

So you were arguing that is was NOT a "clear requirement" of the Constitution? You danced yourself right into another corner.

192 posted on 03/13/2009 9:47:33 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Any positive law that alienates the right of the innocent to live is not a law at all. It is a gross act of rebellion against God, man, nature, our organic law, the Constitution, and the American form of republican government.

Your argument is so stupid. Just because there are state laws against murder and rape doesn’t mean the states can decide to go the other way, and “legalize” murder and rape. They are required to make such laws, to be consistent with the Constitution.

If the state you live in made a law “legalizing” the murder of all FR posters with the nickname “Mojave,” what would the sworn duty of all officers of the United States be? Would such a “law” be enforcable by anyone? Would there be an imperative duty by all to protect the unalienable rights of “Mojave” or, would “state power” prevail?


193 posted on 03/13/2009 9:53:09 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

There’s nothing wrong with demanding that these oaths be kept.

However you seem to place a lot of faith in elected officials and man in general to do the right thing.

Our recent leaders are not moral men. It is obvious that they cannot be trusted to make, follow, execute or administer the law in any way.

God has given us over to immoral leadership because of our disobedience. We will not be rid of the immoral leaders until we start to obey God and His Commandments and repent of personal and national sins.

In practice, for the foreseeable future there is zero chance that the federal government will use what many of us constitutionalists consider to be unconstitutional police powers for “good” purposes. On the other hand, there is a 100% chance they will use these police powers to deprive us of life, liberty and property.

The ring of Sauron needs to be cast into Mt. Doom.


194 posted on 03/13/2009 9:54:28 PM PDT by SecAmndmt (Arm yourselves!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Nonsense. Burke was arguing against the constitutionality of a New York state law “legalizing” abortion.


195 posted on 03/13/2009 9:54:31 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: SecAmndmt

That’s exactly what I argue.

Until Christians STOP compromising this country cannot be saved.

Until Americans regain their understanding of America’s principles, America will continue its slide to destruction. And no one but God Himself knows when it will be too late to turn back.


196 posted on 03/13/2009 9:57:08 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Your 192 doesn’t make any sense.


197 posted on 03/13/2009 9:58:00 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Just because there are state laws against murder and rape doesn’t mean the states can decide to go the other way, and “legalize” murder

I should have guessed, The left hates the death penalty.

198 posted on 03/13/2009 10:01:07 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance
Burke was arguing against the constitutionality of a New York state law “legalizing” abortion.

Blackmun voided laws against and compelled all states to "legalize" abortions, using the 14th Amendment wild-card attack on the Constitution that you've embraced.

199 posted on 03/13/2009 10:03:52 PM PDT by Mojave (Don't blame me. I voted for McClintock.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

You’re making less and less sense with every post. You’re starting to hallucinate.


200 posted on 03/13/2009 10:04:24 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (Pro-choice for states is pro-choice. This destroys America...it's all Pluribus and no more Unum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 261-269 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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