What's new
  • ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

Trump thread part 2 (Or anything else we want to talk about that's ridiculous in politics today)

mean mr.mustard

I Pass Satellites
Veteran
The Constitution presupposes it has authority, even though nobody that made it is alive today and most people alive today have never read it or know jack shit about it. But, "it's what keeps us free" Lol.

Considering that it appears that you might have missed the definition (and purpose) of the Constitution, may I ask if you have read and understand it?
 

Captain Red Eye

Active member
Considering that it appears that you might have missed the definition (and purpose) of the Constitution, may I ask if you have read and understand it?

Yes. I've read it, haven't memorized it word for word but I think I understand the intentions to be a template for how a particular government will operate.

Although, I don't necessarily agree that it should be a binding contract or obligate people born hundreds of years after it was written. Would you be cool if I said I had a piece of paper my great great great etc. grandfather and some of his friends put together that bound you to their ideas?
For more on that, I refer you to the opening salvo of Lysander Spooners thoughts on the Constitution as written in his essay, No treason, The Constitution of No Authority.

I do like many aspects of the bill of rights and thought the Declaration of Independence was kind of a cool, "fuck you" to King George.

I apologize if my breath smells like turkey. You know the routine, leftovers.
 

PadawanWarrior

Well-known member
Fuckin delicious is what it is
This was my favorite until they discontinued it.
GwQQHo26QwStIlq23qow_HH rice oriental.jpg


But I also miss fish balls, :ROFLMAO:
fed4469113f0841a793f93a47c99454e.jpg
 

mean mr.mustard

I Pass Satellites
Veteran
I don't necessarily agree that it should be a binding contract or obligate people born hundreds of years after it was written. Would you be cool if I said I had a piece of paper my great great great etc. grandfather and some of his friends put together that bound you to their ideas?

The Constitution was designed to be evolving and fluid...
 

Captain Red Eye

Active member
Probably because I read that part about the Amendments...

I see your point, it can be and has been amended. Until it's amended, changes or deviations are deemed "unconstitutional".

Odd though, that the alleged bill of rights which purports to enumerate some rights can say one thing, which any future amendments could shift what some rights are or aren't. Given that, it would be better to call it the bill of revocable and flexible privileges, instead of the bill of rights.

I was hoping to get you to read Lysander Spooner's thoughts on the Constitution. His thoughts appear to be sound. Point being, some people acted as though the constitution gave them authority and consent, when none was actually given, and it perpetuates today. I contend it's not a document that wholly protects rights, if at its onset, it assumed consent of those living and the consent of the future unborn.
 

mean mr.mustard

I Pass Satellites
Veteran
I see your point, it can be and has been amended. Until it's amended, changes or deviations are deemed "unconstitutional".

Odd though, that the alleged bill of rights which purports to enumerate some rights can say one thing, which any future amendments could shift what some rights are or aren't. Given that, it would be better to call it the bill of revocable and flexible privileges, instead of the bill of rights.

I was hoping to get you to read Lysander Spooner's thoughts on the Constitution. His thoughts appear to be sound. Point being, some people acted as though the constitution gave them authority and consent, when none was actually given, and it perpetuates today. I contend it's not a document that wholly protects rights, if at its onset, it assumed consent of those living and the consent of the future unborn.

I am fairly certain what an anarchist would say about any government framework.
 

Captain Red Eye

Active member
I am fairly certain what an anarchist would say about any government framework.

Actually, what Lysander Spooner says regards contracts is what most government courts say. A contract isn't binding until the parties to it have signed, absent duress.

So, isn't it odd that courts refer to the constitution / bill of rights in making judgements, yet according to their own laws it doesn't contain the elements of a binding contract?

Not that the legislative, executive and court people who have never considered or don't care about the above, actually stay within the alleged confines of the document.
 

yesum

Well-known member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
The reporters going to jail was if they broke the law, not if they criticized Trump. That is what I heard.

The comparison/cartoon of American Indians/Mongolians deporting Euros is telling, but not in the way intended. They were unable to expel the Euros and had their way of life ruined/changed. The US as it is, can expel people. Thanks for making my point.

I do not appreciate the 'orange' hate. Bias based on color is bad, ok?:confused:
 
Top