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

To: eyedigress

That’s exactly my point. You don’t need to acquiesce to an unconstitutional law to show and prove it is unconstitutional. The analogy works: saying you have to acquiesce to an unconstitutional law to show it is unconstitutional is like saying you have to get cancer before showing it is a deadly disease. That’s silly.


240 posted on 03/25/2015 5:13:43 PM PDT by PapaNew (The grace of God & freedom always win the debate in the forum of ideas over unjust law & government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies ]


To: PapaNew

He isn’t acquiescing to anything. He he following current law.

If he does not do it then you must be claiming he take the Senate plan.

Walk that one out if you will.


245 posted on 03/26/2015 7:26:55 PM PDT by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies ]

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