To: davidosborne
To initiate an intelligent debate, forgetting about the court. What is correct or incorrect about his statements. I'd like to get past the emotion, and have an intelligent discussion before I come to a conclusion.
To: borntodiefree
Well, in the first place Lew is not worried about the words "under GOD'. He like all in the neo-confederate movement hate the word "indivisible". The new secessionist movement is itching for the pre civil war confederation. He is just using this decision as a convenient event to advance his "dream".
To: borntodiefree
I am not sure that an "intelligent" debate is possible.. it is a matter of AFFIRMATION.. that the MAJORITY of Americans still consider America to be...
![](http://images.fotki.com/v4/photos/3/35603/68232/one_nation-vi.jpg)
I suggest the reaction of the U.S. Senate clearly suggests that we are...
FReegards
To: borntodiefree
To initiate an intelligent debate, forgetting about the court. What is correct or incorrect about his statements. I'd like to get past the emotion, and have an intelligent discussion before I come to a conclusion. What emotion?
What conclusion?
Once upon a time some things were so self evident and common sense that it was a matter of ridicule to question them.
Human beings haven't changed that much, but the coddling of mental deficients has become the end in itself.
The best that can be said for those who would parse ever word and comma in the Constitution is that they need to get a life.
The phrase "when you see the first bit of a sunrise, the sun isn't really there yet", could amuse these losers without a life indefinitely.
The laws are a means to an end and the social contract is what is being addressed: rights and obligations.
Fall into the liberal trap of rights without obligations and rule by the incompetent is the inevitable result.
It's the Law of Social Entropy.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson