US Constitution

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi


US constitution was written based on the Lockean ideal of democracy. Lockean democracy first and foremost recognizes the rights of the individual come first and that you should not be hurt just because an arbitrary majority of the population says so. We have rights irrespective of what groups of people want, and those rights should be honored.

so basically....the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many?

sounds like utter BS to me.

And where does it say in the constitution that its based on the "Lockean ideal of democracy"?

The Constitution is inspired not because of what it said originally, it's inspired because the founding fathers were smart enough to realize that they didn't and couldn't know what would happen in the future. They knew that it would have to be changed and allowances were made for those changes.

They are called amendments.

I would support the abolishment of guns if ALL could be accounted for, but that isn't going to happen....ever.

[loinburger]

Re: Re: Re: Re: US Constitution

Originally posted by MrFun
I do not post the same points repeatedly, unless it is clear that people still do not understand what my arguments are.

You're still the only person I've ever seen quote himself, MrFun...

[MrFun]

I do that infrequently, and only for two reasons -- when the people participating seem to not understand my point, or when my post might have been missed because a couple of other people have posted at the same time.

You make it sound like I do that for no apparent reason, and out of a compulsory habit. That is not the case.

[Wraith]

--"so basically....the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many?"

Not exactly. More a "without recognizing the needs of the few you cannot provide the needs of the many". It's that whole the ends do not justify the means thing.

Wraith
"When "the common good" of a society is regarded as something apart from and superior to the individual good of its members, it means that the good of some men takes precedence over the good of others, with those others consigned to the status of sacrificial animals."
-- Ayn Rand

[loinburger]

Originally posted by MrFun
You make it sound like I do that for no apparent reason, and out of a compulsory habit. That is not the case.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, since the alternative is that you are a narcissist.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by loinburger


I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, since the alternative is that you are a narcissist.

I never knew you enjoyed trolling -- usually you are not into trolling.

Anyway, since I have quoted myself only a few times, and when I did, I felt I had legitimate reasons to do so, it's the end of this subject.

Find something better to do than trolling -- you're usually a better person than that on Apolyton I thought.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by MrFun
I never knew you enjoyed trolling -- usually you are not into trolling.

I hadn't intended it to be a troll, just a flip remark. Like I said, you're the only person I've ever seen quote himself, so when I saw somebody else do something similar I immediately thought "Hey, that's just like something MrFun would do!" When you took umbrage, I explained why I made the flip remark, albeit in my usual less-than-tactful manner.

If I'd wanted to be a troll about it I'd have started a new thread about your posting habits or something similarly intended to draw attention.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by loinburger


I hadn't intended it to be a troll, just a flip remark. Like I said, you're the only person I've ever seen quote himself, so when I saw somebody else do something similar I immediately thought "Hey, that's just like something MrFun would do!" When you took umbrage, I explained why I made the flip remark, albeit in my usual less-than-tactful manner.

If I'd wanted to be a troll about it I'd have started a new thread about your posting habits or something similarly intended to draw attention.

Ok, fine -- yours was not a troll.

How about you accept some strawberries from me as an apology for my misunderstanding??

[loinburger]

Originally posted by MrFun
Ok, fine -- yours was not a troll.

How about you accept some strawberries from me as an apology for my misunderstanding??

Strawberries are always a welcome change to my spaghetti-and-beer diet.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think he'd perfer bananas .

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I think he'd perfer bananas .

You bannana supremacists are all alike.

But anyway -- back to the original topic. I will make everyone happy for the time being, and shut up for now.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by MrFun
But anyway -- back to the original topic.

Don't do that. I much preferred this thread when it was being threadjacked. There are too damned many gun-control threads on the front page at the moment...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Woohoo!

You've made me happy at least

Now don't mess it up by posting again.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by David Floyd
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, a SCOTUS majority opinion has stated that the meaning of the Constitution cannot be altered, therefore goodbye to Mac's argument

David: Example: The 17th Amendment: Income Tax (I believe)
It is legal because the Supreme Court upheld its legality and because it was added to the constitution by a vote.

The Constitution allows for additions and amendments.

Thus it may be altered.

[David Floyd]

David: Example: The 17th Amendment: Income Tax (I believe)
It is legal because the Supreme Court upheld its legality and because it was added to the constitution by a vote.

The Constitution allows for additions and amendments.

Thus it may be altered.

Amendments don't precisely change the meaning of the Constitution, but in any case you know what Justice Brewer meant when he said it and what I meant when I alluded to it.