Replies

Only in the context of having this borderless world use the Constitution of the UNITED STATES as a guideline.

False.

Your statement seems contradictory, although perhaps I am not understanding it. Do "people" have the "right" to determine that landlords and employers in fact don't have the right to rent to and hire whom they choose? If so, do they then have the right to decide, if they are so inclined, that the Boy Scouts can't refuse to associate with gays? Or does the right to hire and employ and choose Scoutmasters as you choose trump the "people's...right to determine what kind of a society they are to live in"? It seems to me that the two "rights" cannot both simultaneously exist.

Roscoe, I think I may have missed your erudition on this idea. Care to take a stab at it? CJ has avoided it like the plague, but an intellectual giant like yourself probably has a good answer for this dilemma.

True

False

True

False

True

False

True

False

True

False

True

False

[Roscoe argues]

Only in the context of having this borderless world use the Constitution of the UNITED STATES as a guideline.

False.

236 posted on 2/19/02 1:52 PM Pacific by Roscoe

Oh? Prove it. Otherwise you are full of barbra striesand. Where is it false? I am a Constitutionalist, once libertarian, and I would have it no other way. Nor would anyone I know or ever spoke with about it. A borderless world that lived under the same principles as set forth in the Constitution MIGHT be a good place to live. A borderless world under the heel of the UN would be hell on earth. So where am I wrong?