So your assertion is that Congress is not required to maintain a Navy? It uses the same words in regards to a militia
"Congress shall have power... To provide and maintain a Navy"
"Congress shall have power... To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia"
Do we need a Constitutional amendment to force Congress to maintain a Navy? Because your assertion is that the second amendment is what forces Congress to provide for the militia.
Inconsistency once again. Again, stupidest argument on Freerepublic ever (and I'll go all the way back to Ash in that assertion.)
Yes. It is your assertion they must?
Congress has the power to declare war. I guess, according to you, they must. Against who?
"Because your assertion is that the second amendment is what forces Congress to provide for the militia."
It is?
I clearly told you, in a post to you, "Since the power was concurrent, the states themselves could arm their Militia. The second amendment protected their ability to do so."
The second amendment was written to protect the states' ability to arm their own militias. Yet you read that as the second amendment forces Congress to provide for the Militia.
How do you do that? How can you you look at what I posted and be so utterly and completely wrong? Is there something wrong with you? Seriously. You need help.
Go get some and I'll see you on the next thread. Good luck and good bye.