- Joined
- Jun 11, 2011
- Messages
- 31,089
- Reaction score
- 4,384
- Location
- The greatest city on Earth
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
...Protesting peacefully puts you into a government database as possible terrorists which practically destroys that right.....
so you're saying that the USA is now a tyrannical regime?
who says the right to own a gun is an "inalienable" right? The Constitution surely does not.
bull****. I have participated in at least 4 very large peaceful protests in NYC & DC since 9-11, and I assure you that I am in no database. paranoid thinking is silly.
just because there are some restrictions and regulations on gun ownership, doesn't mean the 2nd Amendment has been "crapped" upon.Much of America has already crapped on the Second Amendment, so I do not understand the "if" in your question.
We've become tyrannical for over 150 years starting with Abraham Lincoln's despotic regime. See American Bastille by John Marshall.....
uhh...yeaahhh..
how dare that evil Abraham Lincoln, take away the right of the people to own other human beings. Tyrant!!!!!
Strawman and not factually correct. Lincoln freed not one slave,...
again, more bull****.
The Proclamation immediately freed 50,000 slaves, with nearly all the rest (of the 3.1 million) freed as Union armies advanced...
Emancipation Proclamation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
sourceAs President, Abraham Lincoln had the power to issue the Emancipation Proclamation. But it was an executive order, not a legislative mandate. The President declared the slaves free, but he had no power to regulate how former "masters" would treat former "possessions."
Presidents execute laws - they don't make them. And, significantly, Lincoln's Proclamation only freed slaves in the Confederate states. (Slaves in states which remained in the Union were not freed until the 13th Amendment was ratified, in December of 1865.)
The Proclamation applied only in ten states that were still in rebellion in 1863, thus it did not cover the nearly 500,000 slaves in the slave-holding border states (Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland or Delaware) which were Union states — those slaves were freed by separate state and federal actions.
...The only person spouting bull**** would be you.
The Proclamation held no force of law because Lincoln lacked the authority to do it since the southern states seceded and he lacked the jurisdiction...
the Emancipation Proclamation immediately freed all slaves that were in southern territory that has ben taken by the north.
as the Union armies advanced, so did freedom for the slaves they encountered.
yes, Abraham Lincoln freed many slaves.
on the contrary, the secession of the CSA was illegal and all Federal laws were still valid over the Southern states, as was the jurisdiction of the Federal government in Washington, D.C.
Secession is not illegal under the Constitution of the United States. It is a right reserved to the people under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Try again.
the States have the right to secede from the Union, in order to preserve the institution of human slavery?
how righteous of you.
tell that to your local black family, and see how they react.
Appeal to emotion and a strawman argument. The states have the right and the duty to arrest federal expansion of powers even to the point of secession. See the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 plus Virginia's Ratification of the Constitution of the United States.
do slaves have the right to rebel against their "owners"?
or are they obligated to respect their "owners" private-property rights?
considering the OP, its fascinating that you are arguing in support of a regime that fought to defend the right to own other human beings.
fascinating..and ironic.
...I find it funny that you cut Lincoln's words on the matter from my post. :lol:
tell us again how Lincoln didn't free any slaves.
That's easy. Lincoln didn't free a single slave and I have the documentation to prove it.
that's interesting, cause the facts prove you wrong.
50,000 slaves were immediately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation. These were slaves that lived within CSA territory that had been liberated by the Union. And as the Union got deeper into Southern territory, every slave they encountered was immediately made free by the EP.
Personally, I believe they were born free..and slavery was illegal as soon as the Constitution was ratified.
Actually, they weren't freed. They were immediately impressed into the Union Army as conscripts for the men which the last I checked conscription is the same as slavery. The women usually were raped and murdered by white Union soldiers.....
a military draft..is slavery? last time I checked, folks who serve in the military get PAID.
as for the women being raped & murdered, I suspect this is a baseless claim.
As others have pointed out, how would those repealing the amendment protect themselves from the danger imposed by the repeal?
That's easy. Lincoln didn't free a single slave and I have the documentation to prove it.
Actually, they weren't freed. They were immediately impressed into the Union Army as conscripts for the men which the last I checked conscription is the same as slavery. The women usually were raped and murdered by white Union soldiers.
My personal opinion has no bearing on historical facts and are out of the scope of this discussion.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?