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.

 

Leave Me Out Of Your Agenda

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

First of all I am NOT 'happy' to pay any taxes, but since SAR is carried out by a military branch it does fall under the 'common defense' clause of the Constitution.



Why are you happy to pay local taxes funding fire departments which help other people, including those who pay no taxes?


Again I am not 'happy' to pay taxes, but at least I have the right to vote on these levies and I am comfortable with making my community better and working with my friends, neighbors and locally elected officials. Again, the key is I get to vote locally, pay locally and work together locally.

I have given my consent in this case to my friends and neighbors. My local vote and consent is the critical aspect that you seem to think you don't need.

I would never force my agenda or needs or personal burdens on another without asking for their help. I expect the same respect in return.




posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
I have given my consent in this case to my friends and neighbors. My local vote and consent is the critical aspect that you seem to think you don't need.
So, urm, let me get this right, you 'give your consent' to fund fire/police departments and search and rescue services for civilians (none of which are in the constitution) but you would not consent to health care.
Please explain the conceptual difference?

Oh, and you still haven't answered my question, as we know the constitution can be amended, and you drop to your knees with gushing love for anything in the constitution, would you suddenly support health care if it was written into the holy constitution? Yes or no?
Purely hypothetical just to counter your "Everything in the constitution is good" sheep like stance.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

I explained it well enough in my previous post, but if you wish to play games then I will explain it for you one more time.

First, I don't have to justify when and how I consent to something I have a right to make that choice without your interference.

Second, I am willing to work with people I know and live with simply because I know and live with them. That is my choice which is what you seem to be wanting me to not to have.

Three (and I already said this), I would not support an amendment that would make me responsible for someone else's personal expenses (like health care).

You also are trying to make my general post about one specific topic. Do you have any thoughts on the rest of what I posed or are you going to continue to beat a dead horse on this one issue? I don't intend to explain it again. If you don't understand asking permission or getting consent and Libertarian principles then go educate yourself. If you simply are an Authoritarian and think you have the right to FORCE compliance on others to whatever you want then say that.

I do not believe in forced compliance and I do not believe in involuntary encounters. If I don't want to talk to you or deal with you I should not have to do so. I choose to be here on ATS. I am choosing to respond to you in this instance. If you don't agree with me that is fine with me, but don't try to force your BS on me because I am not interested.

I am finished with you unless you have a new topic you want to discuss.
edit on 2015/12/3 by Metallicus because: sp



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
I am finished with you unless you have a new topic you want to discuss.
Nope, I'm happy now I see how you pick and choose which socialist policies you adopt.
Clearly your 'constitution' arguments are a load of bull# as it can be amended and if it was to include healthcare then you would not support it. Again, it shows you only agree with the constitution if it agrees with you, lol, your entire argument is easy to pick to pieces, but I'm done with amusing myself so I'll leave you to your childlike and poorly reasoned rant.

...I'm not advocating health care for your nation though so no agenda with me, just calling out your crap logic regarding taxes and the holy constitution which can be amended, but you only support if it agrees with you, lol!
Laterz man, I prefer a higher standard of debate to be honest, yours is lacking.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand
Grain mate please stop making posts I agree with, it confuses me.


edit on 3-12-2015 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: grainofsand
Grain mate please stop making posts I agree with, it confuses me.

Hahaha! I've been in full agreement with solo today...just haven't admitted it to him



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

The Constitution can be amended, yes, but have you studied what it takes to do so?

It's not like it's as easy as electing the president even.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: grainofsand

The Constitution can be amended, yes, but have you studied what it takes to do so?

It's not like it's as easy as electing the president even.

Doesn't matter how difficult the process is, just that it CAN be amended, so anyone who meekly bleats "If it's in the constitution I agree with it" is governed by the whim of fellow citizens.
The OP regularly whines that if something is not in the constitution then he doesn't support it so I counter with the hypothetical situation that if health care was added to it then by default he must support it.
He only agrees with the holy constitution if it agrees with him though, or so it seems.
I find that amusing, and a childlike position to take.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Not really.

You are talking about something that would take an overwhelming, as in more than 2/3, majority of the American populace and Congress to agree to.

Right now, it's a pretty safe bet that the COTUS isn't going to be changing very easily barring sudden radical upheaval in society. Certainly not to make health care a right.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

I asked you what your point was, care to answer?
Just seemed to me you were sucking up to the OP with your 'live and let live' line, pretty crap discussion forum if we are all to bow to whatever the OP spouts don't ya think?
...so, what was your point exactly?


My point being that it's easy to instantly reply without really thinking about what mood we are in, at the particular time it occurs.

I get your point about the U.S, but to be honest, you seemed to attack the thread without really considering what you were saying. Just my opinion, I could be wrong. I could be right!!



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: grainofsand

Not really.

You are talking about something that would take an overwhelming, as in more than 2/3, majority of the American populace and Congress to agree to.

Right now, it's a pretty safe bet that the COTUS isn't going to be changing very easily barring sudden radical upheaval in society. Certainly not to make health care a right.



I have the utmost respect for Grainy, but maths isn't his strong point.

Oh and he should rein it in with the attitude.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Just because things are bad doesn't mean I want them to get worse. There is really zero chance of anything like you are talking about getting into the Constitution. It is just too hard.

Monkeys may fly out of my derriere as well, but I don't worry about it because the chance is close to zero.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand


He only agrees with the holy constitution if it agrees with him though, or so it seems.


This is absolutely FALSE.

You will find no part of the current document that I disagree with except one and that is the 16th amendment that allowed the Government to levy an income tax.

Even though I disagree with this amendment I do comply with it because it is in the Constitution. Now, please show me what part of the Constitution I don't comply with or retract your ridiculous statement.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

So, hypothetically speaking and for the sake of debate, if the constitution was changed to include healthcare you would accept that yeah?
I'm simply investigating the point because you regularly use the constitution as your mantra for whatever you agree with.

...oh and you pick and choose which socialist services you are willing to pay taxes for but with no clear policy of why some services are acceptable to you compared to others.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
I have the utmost respect for Grainy, but maths isn't his strong point.
You know nothing about my understanding of maths and your comment seems rather childlike and silly to be honest.


Oh and he should rein it in with the attitude.
What, did I upset your best mate or something? Click alert instead of whining fella. I'm making reasoned points, why are you crying about my 'attitude' here, sucking up to the OP or something?



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

If the Constitution were to be modified I would accept it much like I do the 16th amendment. Now as far as why I make the choices I do I already explained that multiple times. I choose to pay for local services because it fits my outlook of regional government and responsibility...anything else I pay grudgingly and under protest.

Now, will you please retract your false statement?

edit on 2015/12/3 by Metallicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

You forgot driving under the influence of drugs/alcohol, people should be allowed to drink/do drugs and drive and only prosecute those who causes a accident doing it, atleast thats how your stance on guns sounds in relation.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: grainofsand

If the Constitution were to be modified I would accept it much like I do the 16th amendment. Now as far as why I make the choices I do I already explained that multiple times. I choose to pay for local services because it fits my outlook of regional government and responsibility...anything else I pay grudgingly and under protest.

Now, will you please retract your false statement?
No.
I said "He only agrees with the holy constitution if it agrees with him though, or so it seems." and you stated yourself


I would not support an amendment that would make me responsible for someone else's personal expenses (like health care).
So yeah, clearly, you only agree with the hallowed constitution if it happens to fall in line with what you agree with.
Weasel your words as much as you like fella but your position is pretty transparent.

...oh, apologies for the late reply, I've been traveling around the UK enjoying real life, only now had the chance or inclination to get back to you.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join