Oh yeah? Well, YOU'RE A BIG POOPY HEAD!
Posted on 06/27/2011 7:44:41 AM PDT by Hojczyk
No details yet
Oh yeah? Well, YOU'RE A BIG POOPY HEAD!
Buy your own so you can play online with them. You can get them used at Gamestop etc.
I haven’t seen a single post on this thread, but I’ll comment before I read them.
This decision is a travesty, perpetrated by a court that thinks we now live in judicial oligarchy instead of a free republic.
And no one in the other branches of government has the understanding or the courage to disabuse them of this destructive false notion.
One side note: Scalia is a joke.
Thank you for some very good posts in this discussion.
What Thomas should have wrote is “The First Amendment only applies to laws made by Congress. Apparently my colleagues can’t read, but if they would like to have a look, it’s the first word of the Amendment.”.
What on earth does that even mean? If you don't want your kids to have violent video games, then man up and tell them. You don't need the Supreme Court's permission to run your own household. Cut off the cable TV. Take away the PS3.
Demanding decency in the community when you've failed to do so under your own roof isn't' the answer. The idea that you need a busybody nanny state regime to do your job as a parent for you is antithetical to conservative, independent existence.
In other words, it's liberalism. You may like the flavor of this particular cause, but it's the same sauce.
Having and believing in a right to representation in your state or community does not equate to liberalism as you claim.
The same ridiculous argument that you make in regards to taking personal responsibility could be applied to any area of life including drug use, sexuality, foul language, violent behavior, etc…
In your world we would have no right to representation on any of these issues and the only rights we would have would be in regards to our own home. This is a version of anarchy.
We today make laws dictating that people clothe themselves in public but by your logic why should we be allowed to tell others whether to clothe themselves? Just take responsibility for your own actions only is your philosophy and have no say on public life is regulated.
Why should we be able to have ‘age of consent’ laws in states? By your logic we should only have a say in regards to our own children.
Why have laws prohibiting hard drugs? By your logic we should tell our children to stay away from it but have no right at all in making laws prohibiting it.
You are a libertarian anarchist who seeks to take away the People’s right to representation on issues.
“Are you all for sex and nudity in public? “
“Dude.
I’m Lazamataz.
What the hell do you think I’d say? “
Alright, you got me there. I should have known better then to ask this question, lol.
Because everyone who might reasonably set a different bar of government interference, immediately becomes a LIBERTARIAN ANARCHIST DICTATOR HIPPY NAZI to you.
Cut it out.
Could you provide the source for that right?
Yea right. I have never used that specific group of words together here at FR before, so you are full of it.
Did you read the post?
“According the American Psychological Association”
God Almighty is the source.
Our form of Representative Republic was formed through spilling the blood of tyrants who sought to deny the People their right to representation on how their communities and states were governed and if need be will be again.
Well, I stand corrected! Here. Let me amend my statement:
You know why I was giving you a huge pile of s**t before?
Because everyone who might reasonably set a different bar of government interference, immediately becomes a LIBERTARIAN, ANARCHIST, DICTATOR, HIPPY, OR NAZI to you.
Cut it out.
I also was not talking about a bar of government interference as you claim. I may not even support this specific law. My problem has to do with the Court acting as if they can deny the People the right to have representation on how their state is governed. There is nothing un-Constitutional about this law at all. You seem to think that the People have no right to representation on public decency and child safety.
Why don’t you show me a citation for how this law is un-Constitutional? Show me the specific part of the Constitution that denies People a right to representation on this issue.
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.