It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chicago pastor forced to HIDE FAMILY after supporting Republican for governor

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Gryphon66

You know what would be nice? Every so often, redrafting the Constitution to account for loopholes that unscrupulous people have used to circumvent liberty at the expense of the population. But unfortunately such a thing would be VERY open to manipulation by those very same unscrupulous people. Sometimes, I look at reality and realize how hopeless the ideal is.


I think that's what many of the Founders envisioned, particularly Jefferson:



I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors...[it] will be said it is easier to find faults than to amend [the Constitution]. I do not think...amendment so difficult as is pretended. Only lay down true principles, and adhere to them inflexibly




posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Gryphon66

You know what would be nice? Every so often, redrafting the Constitution to account for loopholes that unscrupulous people have used to circumvent liberty at the expense of the population. But unfortunately such a thing would be VERY open to manipulation by those very same unscrupulous people. Sometimes, I look at reality and realize how hopeless the ideal is.


I have to agree with your conclusion--that frequently re-drafting the Constitution would actually make matters worse as that it is much more likely that unscrupulous and power hungry people would use that as an opportunity to further erode our civil liberties. Those type of people are constantly saying that the Constitution needs "updating" as it is old and out of date and does not reflect the issues of a modern society. I see that as an excuse. They know that the Constitution really stands in their way and they want to remove what few remaining roadblocks to their agenda it represents.

Certainly the FF provided a means of Amending the Constitution, but they intentionally made this a difficult and convoluted process because they imagined this very scenario. The problems we have do not lie with a flawed Constitution, but rather that it and the intent of it are soundly ignored by politicians by and large.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well Jefferson was one of the first Libertarians, if not in name in practice, in our country. Very wise man in matters of government.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

Yes, this is very true. But sometimes it is nice to imagine a successful update of the Constitution to remove things like lobbying Congress, preventing Congressmen from holding stocks, term limits on Congress, etc. Though obviously a real update of the Constitution wouldn't go over like we'd imagine.



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I have to admit, he's my favorite (well, maybe he and Franklin) ... polymath, cultured, able to evolve his beliefs.

Oh well. Best, enough off-topic from me. LOL



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Churches and their reps are not supposed to be political. He broke the law, now strip their not for profit tax status



posted on Oct, 29 2014 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

You already sourced and admitted the tax code change was done to silence Republican leaning groups. YOU sourced it.



posted on Oct, 31 2014 @ 12:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
So, and I'm just spitballin' here, I wonder if the good pastor had recommended Democratic candidates whether or not any of you would have a) suggested that his church lose its tax exempt status, b) asked for proof of the death threats, etc. etc. or c) suggested that the Pastor himself may have made off with the cash in the collection box.

Not that I'm suggesting any of those things happened, you understand, just running a thought experiment.



It is a good policy for all not to use stereotypes that we see both sides do, but the reason this is usually seen so often is due to the main stream liberal media who ALWAYS use them, i.e.; all conservatives are Christian gun lovers just for one, but you know the drill, I don't need to repeat these axioms.
If there were a good old pastor recommending democrat candidates you wouldn't know about it through the MSM because that goes against, and breaks one of their trusted stereotypes that there aren't any democrat Christians or pastors.
edit on 31-10-2014 by NoCorruptionAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Being black in Chicago and saying you are a Republican is akin to suicide. This is specific to South-Chicago where "Democrats" have a cult-like status and are much further to the left than the Democrat base. Really bad idea. If you are black and live in Chicago and favor Republicans its best to keep quiet about it. These "liberals" are more oppressive than McCarthy in the 50s, and certainly more violent.



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 12:53 PM
link   
So it's black people that are doing this, not "democrats". Thanks for being honest and not misleading everyone.



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
So it's black people that are doing this, not "democrats". Thanks for being honest and not misleading everyone.


"Chicago Democrats" include many races and cultures and religions.

Dozens in fact.




posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328
So it's black people that are doing this, not "democrats". Thanks for being honest and not misleading everyone.


Chicago Democrats and Chicago Blacks are a different breed of Democrat and also different breed of black. They take their politics very seriously.



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Gryphon66

You already sourced and admitted the tax code change was done to silence Republican leaning groups. YOU sourced it.


Nope, I straightened out your misrepresentations about the Johnson Amendment. The tax code change was part of the massive reorganization in the Revenue Act of 1954. I see you're still trying to pull the same thing. The last time, you were arguing that it was directed at churches, which you argued were all automatically right-wing.

You could argue, fallaciously since the Act passed both the House and the Senate, that the Johnson Amendment was directed at LBJ's political rivals in Texas, like Howard Hunt, but you're not even striving for that level of honesty.

Can't even argue for your side anymore without misrepresenting the truth?



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Are you genuinely claiming that only the "main stream liberal media" are the only ones that use stereotypes on a regular basis???

How about the "mainstream wingnut media and its echo chambers" Have you never watched Fox News, or Rush Limbaugh, or Ann Coulter, or read any of the hundreds of blogs that cut-and-paste the same silly talking points day-after-day?

Did I hear you correctly?



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Are you genuinely claiming that only the "main stream liberal media" are the only ones that use stereotypes on a regular basis???

How about the "mainstream wingnut media and its echo chambers" Have you never watched Fox News, or Rush Limbaugh, or Ann Coulter, or read any of the hundreds of blogs that cut-and-paste the same silly talking points day-after-day?

Did I hear you correctly?


Even if it was ALL you and yours, would you still need to find a way to blame some other group? Can you ever admit your supported bunch have some serious problems? No, I don't think you can and you have proven it on here so many times.
'
No one can blame yours without you saying "what about Bush?" Whaaaa! " "What about the GOP Whaaaaa!

I think it's hilarious to see such whining entitled children.



posted on Nov, 1 2014 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Wow, I didn't know you were a fan ... LOL. Thanks for following my "work" so closely.


I think it's equally hilarious to see children who are so spoiled, they always think it's the other kid that's whining.

You know, like the whiny little tattle-tale kid that runs to rat out the others for the crap that he was doing?

I'm referring to your post, if I'm being too subtle.

But good on you for tossing in the "entitled" bit, right? Democrats, social services, entitlements, right?

I'm so glad to see you're absolutely free of using stereotypes, yes sirree. Just like your buddies at Fox, et. al.

You're making a stream of general statements with nothing to back it up.

I don't think you'll find that I've "blamed Bush" for much that he didn't do.

My usual approach in dealing with winger garbage is to point out the facts with references and sources.

Unlike, rather humorously, what you're doing here; and I bet you still don't' notice, do you?

Your whole schmear of an argument is contending that I am doing what I charged "you and yours" with doing.

But I warn you, I won't respond if you come back with "I know you are but what am I??? Nyah."

Present something factual.



new topics




 
21
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join