# Has the 14th Amendments “Equal Protection Clause” Been Misinterpreted by the Courts?



## Bush92 (Oct 26, 2018)

14th Amendment
If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Oct 26, 2018)

To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.


----------



## Dan Stubbs (Oct 26, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> 14th Amendment
> If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?


*I would think they don't have the right.  Progressive think they should have complete


 control over everything you say or do.*


----------



## Monk-Eye (Nov 2, 2018)

*" Endowments Versus Protections "*

** Public Versus Private **


Bush92 said:


> 14th Amendment
> If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?


The private sector is not obligated to comply with stipulations of non discrimination policies , however the us government does .

The us government enacts its requirements for non discrimination on private corporations as a stipulation of private companies being awarded contracts to provide government services .


----------



## DGS49 (Nov 2, 2018)

Monk-Eye, you are correct, but many municipalities pass anti-discrimination laws, ignoring the question of whether they have the Constitutional right to do so.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 2, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> 14th Amendment
> If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?


Public accommodation laws do that.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 2, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.


Nobody Made you get a business license.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 2, 2018)

Dan Stubbs said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > 14th Amendment
> ...


we have a general welfare clause not a general warfare clause.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 2, 2018)

DGS49 said:


> Monk-Eye, you are correct, but many municipalities pass anti-discrimination laws, ignoring the question of whether they have the Constitutional right to do so.


That is a reason for the licensing.  You have to volunteer for that.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 2, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.
> ...


When you did, nobody should tell you who you have to serve.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 2, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.
> ...


Hey Communist...capitalism is a good thing.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 2, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > 14th Amendment
> ...


It’s my money. Why do I have to accommodate everyone? Oh, the 1960’s happened and socialist force me too.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 3, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


The Public.  Public accommodation is about serving the Public.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 3, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


maybe, if you were a Good capitalist.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 3, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


lol.  Work from home.  Nobody is making you make more profit in Public Accommodation, accommodating the Public.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 3, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


So  you’re  outta touch with reality.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 3, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


no special pleading from me.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 3, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


But you advocate it fir others...and that’s bullshit for America.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 3, 2018)

My father was a factory worker. I had no white privilege and fought my way up from the bottom. I’m sick and tired of crybaby blacks saying I had “white privilege”.  Go  fuck  yourself.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 3, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


only the right wing does that.  they are clueless and Causeless.


----------



## Monk-Eye (Nov 4, 2018)

*" Not Entrepreneurs Rather Bureaucratic Sociopaths "*

** Authoritarian Clown Shoes Reject Individualism **


danielpalos said:


> Nobody Made you get a business license.


And you do not understand a distinction between protections and endowments ,  between negative liberties and positive liberties .

Basic premises presumed by non aggression principles are individualism that includes self ownership ( free roam , free association , progeny ) and self determination ( private property , willful intents ) .

If someone opens their doors to public access then discrimination between patrons of the public is not valid , save a contract to negotiate services where private discretion can be introduced ; alternatively , employee representation is subject to private discretion and it is not a policy that bureaucrats decide .

It may be that a state is obligated to procure products or services from companies that hire consistently with state non discrimination obligations , but otherwise the state should not be capable of issuing a directive for non discrimination policies upon private corporations .


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 4, 2018)

Monk-Eye said:


> *" Not Entrepreneurs Rather Bureaucratic Sociopaths "*
> 
> ** Authoritarian Clown Shoes Reject Individualism **
> 
> ...


You don't get to be a despot in public accommodation.


----------



## Monk-Eye (Nov 4, 2018)

*" Free Enterprise Incompetent Government Thug "*

** Loony Tunes **


danielpalos said:


> You don't get to be a despot in public accommodation.


Are you stating that about yourself ?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 5, 2018)

Monk-Eye said:


> *" Free Enterprise Incompetent Government Thug "*
> 
> ** Loony Tunes **
> 
> ...


lol.  no.  I understand natural rights are not just about guns.


----------



## Monk-Eye (Nov 5, 2018)

*" Self Righteous Bureaucratic Hypocrites "*

** Clueless Precept **


danielpalos said:


> lol.  no.  I understand natural rights are not just about guns.


Any notion of the contemporary premise for " natural rights " , for " inalienable rights " , is pure idiocy .

Let us know when you are bold enough to create a corporation , choose your own employees and through your own personal volition , give it all away to a collective socialist , communist , cause .


----------



## Slashsnake (Nov 8, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> 14th Amendment
> If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?



Businesses aren't required to follow the U.S Constitution, but the courts interpret the laws like that anyways.

The courts are highly illogical... I'll give you a few examples. 

1) Free speech. I have a right to free speech... A judge shouldn't be allowed to throw me in jail if I call him an asshole. 
2) Free speech and religion. A ruling that failed to defend the Colorado baker's rights to not make a cake for a gay couple. 
3) Free speech. Schools can regulate language and the clothing you wear. 
4) Free speech. The Colorado baker is regulated, but my employer can fire me for using foul language. 


The courts are clueless and sit unchecked by a Congress ran by goofy, elderly people.


----------



## Monk-Eye (Nov 8, 2018)

*" Just Add Puritanical Manure "*

** Private Despots **


Slashsnake said:


> Businesses aren't required to follow the U.S Constitution, but the courts interpret the laws like that anyways.


yahoo.com is in contention for king of comment censorship on the internet .

The constitution issues limits and prohibitions on government , but those limits and prohibitions do not extend to private property of despots .


----------



## MarathonMike (Nov 9, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> My father was a factory worker. I had no white privilege and fought my way up from the bottom. I’m sick and tired of crybaby blacks saying I had “white privilege”.  Go  fuck  yourself.


Does anyone ever talk about Black Privilege? If you are Black and you work hard and stay out of trouble, there is no end of opportunity for you today. If you go for a job and compete with a White person of equal ability, you will get the job 9 times out of 10. If you apply for college, you will be selected over MORE qualified white applicants. Black Privilege is real.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 9, 2018)

MarathonMike said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > My father was a factory worker. I had no white privilege and fought my way up from the bottom. I’m sick and tired of crybaby blacks saying I had “white privilege”.  Go  fuck  yourself.
> ...


Happens everyday. But white liberals living in the safety of the suburbia don’t get it. Soon they will feel the threat that lower middle-class and poor whites have felt for some time.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 9, 2018)

Dan Stubbs said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > 14th Amendment
> ...


That is not what a progressive is no matter how you try to twist the meaning of the word.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 9, 2018)

MarathonMike said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > My father was a factory worker. I had no white privilege and fought my way up from the bottom. I’m sick and tired of crybaby blacks saying I had “white privilege”.  Go  fuck  yourself.
> ...


There is such thing as "no end to opportunity".


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 9, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> MarathonMike said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


Man talk about a defeatist attitude, you must be retired...It doesn't work that way in the real world most do not ever apply for any type of an advantage and everyone is ignorant to a company until they are trained or have OJT.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 9, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


So the Constitution is a communist document along with the Declaration of Independence?


----------



## Care4all (Nov 9, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> 14th Amendment
> If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?


They can probably make their business a "Private Club" of some sort, if they do not want to serve the whole Public and the people they only want to serve, can be members only, maybe?

Of course that would likely cut their business in half or more, by not wanting to serve the whole public.


----------



## Care4all (Nov 9, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.


utter, ignorant, bull crud!  No one is a slave if they are paid the same price as everyone, for the job they perform.


----------



## Monk-Eye (Nov 9, 2018)

*" Simple Dichotomy With Contempt "*

** Transgressions Beyond Adequate Measures **


Moonglow said:


> That is not what a progressive is no matter how you try to twist the meaning of the word.


The " progressive " is inclined toward positive liberties of endowments through bureaucratic authoritarianism of government , rather than being inclined toward negative liberties of protection from bureaucratic authoritarianism of government and of protection for individual liberty from other private individuals .


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 9, 2018)

Monk-Eye said:


> *" Simple Dichotomy With Contempt "*
> 
> ** Transgressions Beyond Adequate Measures **
> 
> ...


That is closer to a liberal.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 9, 2018)

Care4all said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.
> ...


They be a wage slave...


----------



## Monk-Eye (Nov 9, 2018)

*" One Liners No Clue "*

*" Due Tell "*


Moonglow said:


> That is closer to a liberal.


A " classical liberal " - a liberal - is inclined towards negative liberties as protections from bureaucratic authoritarianism of government , as well as protections of individualism from other private individuals .

A " conservative " is inclined towards bureaucratic authoritarianism of government , the consequences of which are not completely clear .

Perhaps you believe that " progressive " is analogous with utilitarianism that is non specific in its possible intentions until they are defined .


----------



## ding (Nov 9, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> 14th Amendment
> If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?


Has the 14th Amendments “Equal Protection Clause” Been Misinterpreted by the Courts?

Yes.  100%.


----------



## ding (Nov 9, 2018)

Moonglow said:


> Dan Stubbs said:
> 
> 
> > Bush92 said:
> ...


What do you believe a progressive is?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 9, 2018)

Monk-Eye said:


> *" Self Righteous Bureaucratic Hypocrites "*
> 
> ** Clueless Precept **
> 
> ...


end our alleged wars on (fill in the blank).   Only the right wing praises the "virtues" of Tax Cut economics in public venues.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 9, 2018)

ding said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > Dan Stubbs said:
> ...


Someone who felt the nation had serious social shortcomings because of industrialization, immigration, and political corruption. Movement died about 1924. Current liberals are 1960’s Socialist that are even further to the left than LBJ’s “Great Society.”


----------



## ding (Nov 9, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Monk-Eye said:
> 
> 
> > *" Self Righteous Bureaucratic Hypocrites "*
> ...


And by end our alleged wars you mean to say legalize drugs and prostitution and open the borders.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 10, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


Madison's Republican Doctrine is worthless under Any form of Capitalism.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 10, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


Nope not socialist, why do you feel the need to show your ignorance about liberals? I am a liberal and everything you have said is not logical or intelligent, you are not even close. I am also from the 1960's those hippies turned into yuppies in the 1980's and sold out the movement.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 10, 2018)

ding said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > Dan Stubbs said:
> ...


A person that seeks to reform and creates laws on their ideas of morals.


----------



## ding (Nov 10, 2018)

Moonglow said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


That could be anyone.  

Here's mine:  

There is no formal defined dogma of the progressive. Instead there is only a vague, rosy notion of something good, noble and just: the advent of these things will bring instant euphoria and a social order beyond reproach. Progressives seeks equality through uniformity and communal ownership Progressivism has an extraordinary ability to incite and inflame its adherents and inspire social movements. Progressives dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities. They desire big government and use big government to implement their morally relativistic social policies. Progressivism is a religion. The religious nature of progressivism explains their hostility towards traditional religions which is that of one rival religion over another. Their dogma is based on materialism, primitive instincts, atheism and the deification of man. They see no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. They practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural Marxism and normalization of deviance. They worship science but are the first to reject it when it suits their purposes. They can be identified by an external locus of control. Their religious doctrine is abolition of private property, abolition of family, abolition of religion and equality via uniformity and communal ownership. They practice critical theory which is the Cultural Marxist theory to criticize what they do not believe to arrive at what they do believe without ever having to examine what they believe. They confuse critical theory for critical thinking. Critical thinking is the practice of challenging what one does believe to test its validity. Something they never do.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 10, 2018)

ding said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


I didn't know we were doing term papers..Progressivism is a religion yet it also afforded you a forty hour work week..at the same time they made laws that  were unenforceable like alcohol and marijuana prohibition. There are very few cultural Marxist in the US but there are millions of christians who are progressives and have no problems wanting big government to enforce it's dogma without any faith in critical thinking(how can you when you believe in something that is not there and never emits a force recognizable to humans.


----------



## ding (Nov 10, 2018)

Moonglow said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


Never go to a gun fight only carrying a tallywhacker.  

There are more cultural marxists here than you think.  They don't even know they have been indoctrinated. Four generations have been.  Thank you John Dewey.  

Yes, many Christians are progressives.  But that has always been the case.  Progressivism is a reaction.  

I don't see a lot of Christians, progressive or otherwise trying to install a theocracy.  But people like you do try and put your "religious" morality into laws.  So I have a hard time seeing why you would mind it if others did too.

Don't tell me about critical thinking.  I've tested all of my beliefs with it.  I can't see how you don't believe there is a higher power than man.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 10, 2018)

ding said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


There is a higher power than man, but you won't find them in any religious text.


----------



## ding (Nov 10, 2018)

Moonglow said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


I disagree.  The aim of all religious texts is so that you will.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 10, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 10, 2018)

Moonglow said:


> Bush92 said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


The “movement?” You mean the socialist movement of left wing 1960’s dope smoking communal hippies.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 10, 2018)

ding said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


Preach it from the mountain top brother!


----------



## dblack (Nov 10, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> If someone owns private property...a business...is it right for the federal government to dictate who they can and cannot serve?



No.


----------



## Bush92 (Nov 10, 2018)

Moonglow said:


> ding said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


Progressivism is a religion? The evangelical movement of 1920’s was opposed to the urban progressive new morality which saw a decline in church attendance.


----------



## Moonglow (Nov 10, 2018)

Bush92 said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > ding said:
> ...


That is the problem with that word, it has morphed from its original meaning.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 10, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.
> ...



Nobody forces you to pay the income tax either.  It's "voluntary" you know.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 10, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


right wing Propaganda? 

Congress is Delegated the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 10, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



Your standard canard around here is that when someone says something you don't like, you seem to cry right wing propaganda.  Are you a communist by any chance?  Just asking.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 10, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


I am quoting our Constitution not merely reciting right wing rhetoric.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Nov 10, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



Where's the quote?


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 10, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



So, if you're accusing me of reciting right wing rhetoric, cite your source verbatim.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 11, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


In our Constitution.  There is no appeal to ignorance of the law, if we are going to quibble.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Nov 11, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



You posted no quote, so no quote can be considered.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 11, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


Congress is Delegated the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic.  Any Problems, right wingers?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Nov 11, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



Yeah.  That is not a quote from the Constitution.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 11, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


Congress has the Power to Tax, for some purpose.  A purpose is solving the problems of our Republic.  Are you on the right wing?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Nov 11, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



I am on MY side.

Limitations on Congress' power to tax & spend for "general welfare"


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 11, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


Congress has the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 11, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



When are you going to say something responsive?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 11, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


Congress has the Power to Tax; it is not a right to tax.


----------



## dblack (Nov 11, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



You're not a regular here, are you?


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 11, 2018)

dblack said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



I haven't been although I've read enough of that one guy's posts to draw the conclusion that he posts cryptic nonsense that sounds like veiled communism.  I'm just asking him.  Does that mean I won't get a direct answer?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 11, 2018)

I understand Madison, unlike the Right Wing.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 11, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> I understand Madison, unlike the Right Wing.



Do you believe in or support socialism or communism?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 11, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > I understand Madison, unlike the Right Wing.
> ...


We have a better understanding of economics now.   We have a mixed market political-economy.  Congress commands fiscal policy and our central bank commands monetary policy.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 11, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



And that has exactly what to do with the 14th Amendment?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 12, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


Your misunderstanding of our Command Economy.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 12, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



I've expressed no view on that either way.  So, you mean you were yanking my chain in your last posting and YOU don't even believe what it is your preaching?   I still don't understand what it is you're selling.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 12, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


The power to provide for the general welfare is general, not common like our common defense clause.


----------



## dblack (Nov 12, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...



You gotta burn one down (or maybe two) to truly grok daniel's genius.


----------



## justinacolmena (Nov 12, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.



You can't open a coffee shop and serve whites only.

You can't systematically rob people of their tools and means of livelihood, and then charge them money for performing _SERVICES_ for them, which they would, _a priori_, be able to do by themselves for themselves.

Right to bear arms vs. professional bodyguards, for instance.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Nov 12, 2018)

justinacolmena said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > To force a business by law to perform labor for anyone for whom they would not voluntarily choose to perform such labor in the absence of such law is nothing less than mandated slavery.
> ...



Not that I would find that desirable, but ... why not?


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 12, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



How does that relate to the 14th Amendment?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 13, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


The general welfare is positive; we should have positive rights.  

The general badfare should require negative rights.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 13, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



Your language is non-responsive and cryptic.  Do you agree with any portion of socialism?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 13, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


Social-ism starts with a Social Contract.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 13, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



Do you think the Constitution is a social contract?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 13, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


It must be.  It is our form of social-ism.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 13, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



And so, finally I get somewhat of an answer.  Did you, by any chance, vote for Bernie Sanders?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 13, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


Social-ism must start with the social contract that defines it.  We have a Constitution.


----------



## justinacolmena (Nov 13, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> justinacolmena said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



There's a lynch mob, and that's where talk up their hate without fear of federal charges for murder, attempted murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and murder for hire.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Nov 13, 2018)

justinacolmena said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > justinacolmena said:
> ...



That doesn't answer the question.


----------



## justinacolmena (Nov 13, 2018)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> That doesn't answer the question.



I'm sick and tired of the Constitution-for-whites-only trope.

All men, that is, all humans, are created equal.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Nov 13, 2018)

justinacolmena said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > That doesn't answer the question.
> ...



Indeed they are.


----------



## EGR one (Nov 13, 2018)

justinacolmena said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > That doesn't answer the question.
> ...



All humans are created equal under the law.  It is fairly obvious that all humans are not created equal.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 13, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



You are the most confusing man in the world.  So, are you now saying you are in favor of a Republic?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 14, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


Social-ism starts with a Social Contract.   Ours defines a Republican form of Government.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 14, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



So, if you are now an advocate of a Republican Form of Government, that means you must have a handle on the limitations on government.  In the Republic as envisioned by the founders,  the Constitution was ratified for "Ourselves (meaning the founders) and our posterity"  and posterity is the families - offspring of the founders, right?


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 14, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


this is our mission statement:



> We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


----------



## dblack (Nov 14, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


Daniel is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside a dense haze of marijuana.


----------



## justinacolmena (Nov 14, 2018)

EGR one said:


> All humans are created equal under the law. It is fairly obvious that all humans are not created equal.



All are entitled to the same rights and protections under the law. And despite unequal appearance, bodily shape or size, there is a lot to the essence of being human that really is exactly like every other human, even though the law in practice heavily discriminates and treats different classes of humans very differently, sometimes brutally, based on certain societal assumptions of race, sex, age, or other aspects of appearance or assumed ancestry.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 14, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


"secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity"

You should, therefore, always held to that standard.


----------



## BS Filter (Nov 14, 2018)

Yes, the 14th amendment is the most abused and misused amendment in the Constitution.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 15, 2018)

BS Filter said:


> Yes, the 14th amendment is the most abused and misused amendment in the Constitution.



The 14th Amendment was illegally ratified.  The only reason some Americans oppose it today is their misunderstanding of the fact that the courts have ruled that if you're born here, you're an American.  That, in no way, shape, fashion, or form creates a so - called anchor baby since the American baby's undocumented parents are still subject to deportation just like any other undocumented immigrant.

The right wants to argue the 14th Amendment as it applies to citizenship, claiming original intent (an argument they NEVER invoke in Second Amendment arguments, BTW.)   Under the right's theory of law, original intent bars children of undocumented immigrants from becoming citizens.  Courts have ruled on this and that ship has sailed.  Born here = citizenship.  Furthermore, if the undocumented were not "subject to the jurisdiction" as some are arguing, then our system could not deport a person not subject to our jurisdiction.  So, we could not do anything to undocumented foreigners.  You are either subject to the jurisdiction or you're not.

Diplomats, dignitaries, maybe a military force here at the behest of our government are not subject to the jurisdiction, but people born here are citizens.  I can promise you that equation isn't going to change.

HOWEVER,  if the American people ever wake up and understand that the 14th Amendment was illegally ratified; that it created two classes of citizens; after creating those two classes of citizens, the courts tried to put everybody under its jurisdiction.  Then, to top all of that off, the 14th Amendment effectively repealed the Bill of Rights, turning God given Rights into mere privileges that government doles out as they see fit.  Void / repeal the 14th Amendment on the basis that it was illegally ratified and you have solved more than the immigration issue.


----------



## BS Filter (Nov 15, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> BS Filter said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, the 14th amendment is the most abused and misused amendment in the Constitution.
> ...


You haven't explained how it was illegally ratified.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 15, 2018)

dblack said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


I provided our mission statement, from our Founding Fathers in Congress assembled.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 15, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


Yes; I hold the "high ground on this" and prefer to give the right wing, political heck, simply for political fun and political practice.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 15, 2018)

BS Filter said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > BS Filter said:
> ...



I don't like reinventing the wheel.  Check this out:

https://www.constitution.org/14ll/no14th.htm

The Fourteenth Amendment is Unconstitutional - Judge L.H. Perez

It’s time to tell the truth; the 14th amendment was never ratified.

https://www.law.ua.edu/pubs/lrarticles/Volume 53/Issue 2/Bryant.pdf


I'll give you more if you like


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 15, 2018)

danielpalos said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...




And somebody told me I couldn't get a straight answer out of you.


----------



## BS Filter (Nov 15, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> BS Filter said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


Naw, I see where you're going.  The problem with this is it's still part of the Constitution whether you believe it is or not.


----------



## Wayne Adams (Nov 15, 2018)

BS Filter said:


> Wayne Adams said:
> 
> 
> > BS Filter said:
> ...



It is not a de jure / lawful part of the Constitution and once a sufficient number of people begin pointing it out, it could fall simply because ten percent of the population would not give it any credence.  It don't take a majority, just enough to keep the Amendment from being enforced.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 15, 2018)

Wayne Adams said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne Adams said:
> ...


i subscribe to the federal doctrine.  there is no provision for excuses, only results.



> The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.



The several States have no recourse over entry into the Union 1808.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 15, 2018)

Amateur 'jurists' are just tiresome at this point. Nothing but a waste of time.


----------

