Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, the Constitution is full of redundant verbiage, isn't it?
Not blacks. Slaves.Hey, the South wanted Blacks counted a whole persons. It was the Northern States that insisted they not be counted as persons at all! the 3/5 was a compromise to get the Constitution passed and ratified by all the States.
And not persons. Populations. Read the clause; it refers not to whole persons but rather to whole numbers of persons.
Please tell me you're smarter than these libs.
good gawd! what an idiot! yet another Commander McBragg showing off their imbecilities?
Populations are comprised of what?
clue: persons?
who were the slaves in America's slave states?
clue: blacks
Yes, the Constitution is full of redundant verbiage, isn't it?Not blacks. Slaves.
And not persons. Populations. Read the clause; it refers not to whole persons but rather to whole numbers of persons.
Please tell me you're smarter than these libs.
good gawd! what an idiot! yet another Commander McBragg showing off their imbecilities?
Populations are comprised of what?
clue: persons?
who were the slaves in America's slave states?
clue: blacks
Should the word numberYes, the Constitution is full of redundant verbiage, isn't it?
good gawd! what an idiot! yet another Commander McBragg showing off their imbecilities?
Populations are comprised of what?
clue: persons?
who were the slaves in America's slave states?
clue: blacks
you've actually accomplished the task of misusing the term 'redundant' to attempt to make a point.
congrats
The Constitution is what the courts say not what internet posters believe
We the people have chosen to delegate the authority to interpret the Constitution to the judicial branch.
Fact
...
facts with little to no context make for poor discusion
Fact
...
facts with little to no context make for poor discusion
So says the one who thinks that natural law is nuttiness on steroids.
I also think that you meant to type none rather than non.
We all make mistakes sometimes, oh holier than thou critic.
We the people have chosen to delegate the authority to interpret the Constitution to the judicial branch.
You can't be this stupid.
Chief Justice Marshall usurped the authority with zero input from "we the people."
The CONSTITUTION failed, citizens.
It allows graft.
If you think I am incorrect about this FATAL FLAW, then please direct me to the place in the COTUS that prevents campaign finance from becoming GRAFT by another name.
So I truly do not give a flying fuck which Party ya'll think is more constitutional.
The COTUS is a joke if it cannot prevent the wholesale purchasing of our government.
We the people have chosen to delegate the authority to interpret the Constitution to the judicial branch.
You can't be this stupid.
Chief Justice Marshall usurped the authority with zero input from "we the people."
Yet the framers and founders did not challenge Marshall at the time. Why? Because what he pushed was not a foreign concept. Judicial review did not start with Marshall.
No usurpation of authority there you imbecile.
Yet the framers and founders did not challenge Marshall at the time. Why? Because what he pushed was not a foreign concept. Judicial review did not start with Marshall.
No usurpation of authority there you imbecile.
(Washington Examiner) The Obama administration announced Wednesday that it would allow insurers to keep until October 2016 health plans that do not meet Obamacare regulations, pushing back another Affordable Care Act deadline well past Novembers midterms.
Facing the prospect of another wave of cancellation notices this fall, the administration took even further action to mitigate the blowback from President Obamas broken promise that all Americans could keep their health care plans under Obamacare.
The Department of Health and Human Services had already given insurers the option of continuing those plans facing cancellation through 2014, and on Wednesday said those policies could remain in effect an additional two years.
For example, if an individual renewed their health plan on Oct. 1, 2016, their coverage would last into 2017.
Were extending this to give people an opportunity to make a judgment about what works best for them and their families, a senior administration official said, briefing reporters on the major policy change.
facts with little to no context make for poor discusion
So says the one who thinks that natural law is nuttiness on steroids.
I also think that you meant to type none rather than non.
We all make mistakes sometimes, oh holier than thou critic.
natural law is as nutty as fruitcake.
natural law is a human construct, so there is nothing natural in nature about it, unless of course you are dealing with human nature
I'm not sure Dante questions definitions for natural law. He just rejects it. That is, he rejects America's founding principle. But then, he's a liberal; what can we say?So says the one who thinks that natural law is nuttiness on steroids.
I also think that you meant to type none rather than non.
We all make mistakes sometimes, oh holier than thou critic.
natural law is as nutty as fruitcake.
natural law is a human construct, so there is nothing natural in nature about it, unless of course you are dealing with human nature
Natural laws are Cosmic laws that are not made by humans.
These laws may not be specifically taught to us but are felt by all at a subconscious level, as if genetically programmed in our psyche. For instance, whether or not specified by law, we are all aware that murder is not fair or a right thing to do.
These laws apply to all human beings at all times, irrespective of Nature imparted differences like gender and race or man-made categorizations like religion, region, culture, caste, creed, language, etc.
Natural laws are, as such, moral codes which we collectively know as the conscience. Anything which does not conform to these codes comes across as immoral or unfair and all human beings, possessing average intelligence and emotional quotients, when faced with the commission of such unfair acts suffer from what we call a guilty conscience, whether or not we admit it.
In ancient times, the validity and righteousness of the positive laws of some of the most greatest civilizations, such as the Greeks, were tested by pitching them against and comparing them with the natural laws. While drafting the laws of any nation, effort was always made to conform the positive laws as close to the natural laws as possible.
Thomas Hobbes, a 16th century English philosopher, rose to wide acclaim owing to the documentation of what, as put down by him, the nineteen laws of Nature pertain to in his legendary treatises, Leviathan and De Cive. To put it in his own words, Hobbes observation of the natural law holds that it is "...a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life, or takes away the means of preserving the same, and to omit that by which he thinks it may best be preserved." The nineteen natural laws, as observed by Hobbes (most of them in his own words), are as follows:-....every man ought to endeavor peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war.
...a man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth, as for peace, and defense of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself.
...men perform their covenants made.
...a man which receiveth benefit from another of mere grace, endeavor that he which giveth it, have no reasonable cause to repent him of his good will.
...every man strive to accommodate himself to the rest.
...upon caution of the future time, a man ought to pardon the offences past of them that repenting, desire it.
...in revenges, men look not at the greatness of the evil past, but the greatness of the good to follow.
...no man by deed, word, countenance, or gesture, declare hatred or contempt of another.
...every man acknowledge another for his equal by nature.
...at the entrance into the conditions of peace, no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest.
...if a man be trusted to judge between man and man, that he deal equally between them.
...such things as cannot be divided, be enjoyed in common, if it can be; and if the quantity of the thing permit, without stint; otherwise proportionably to the number of them that have right.
...the entire right, or else...the first possession... of any object which ...can neither be divided nor enjoyed in common... may be decided upon by a method of lottery.
...those things which cannot be enjoyed in common, nor divided, ought to be adjudged to the first possessor; and in some cases to the first born, as acquired by lot.
...all men that mediate peace be allowed safe conduct.
...they that are at controversie, submit their Right to the judgment of an Arbitrator.
...no man is a fit Arbitrator in his own cause.
It is immoral/ incorrect for any person to take upon the responsibility of a judge in any case in which greater profit, or honor, or pleasure apparently ariseth [for him] out of the victory of one party, than of the other.
In case of a dispute regarding the facts of the case, it is the duty of the judge to give equal weight to the testimony of both parties. In the absence of adequate evidence, such a judge should pass verdict on the case based upon the testimony of other witnesses.
This theory, as observed from the above discussion, is founded upon cosmic principles of right and wrong which are instinctively etched upon the human psyche at a sublime level of consciousness. Whether we are consciously told or not, we are always instinctively aware of whether we are doing the right things or doing things in the right way or not. This subliminal understanding and subconscious awareness of human ethics and cosmic fair play is what guides us in our decision between right and wrong, good and bad.
Neither, adv. - used before the first of two (or occasionally more) alternatives that are being specified (the others being introduced by nor) to indicate that they are each untrue or each do not happen.
Both, adv., pronoun. - used before the first of two alternatives to emphasize that the statement being made applies to each (the other alternative being introduced by and).
The. Same. Sit down, Seawytch.
