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.

 

My America or No America

page: 9
33
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Where in the Constitution is that rule?


Did I say my idea was taken straight out of the Constitution?




posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: loam



Hillary: "You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about. That's why I believe if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and/or the Senate, that's when civility can start again..."


That is disturbing.

Seriously.



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 05:45 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

"The beatings will continue until morale improves" or "Hillary supports raping America until America loves her."



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
I'm blessed to have made the decision to not have any children in America. What a sad state of affairs for hatred of your fellow Americans to be resurrected once again. Even the discussion of a possible civil war in America is abhorrent.

I get the feeling that some members even welcome the coming chaos, anarchy and blood in the streets. The racial hatred is impossible to ignore.


You know, I remember studying the Civil War in school. I remember thinking to myself "Whew! Glad that could never happen today!"

But now? I can see it, and it scares the heck out of me. I do not welcome nor want it.

But I will NEVER back down from it, should it happen. And there are MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of people who think the same way.

It scares me because I know what side will win, and what will happen because of it.

After the Civil War, a different America emerged. We were no longer the same nation, we had lost our innocence. The same will happen now if it gets to that point. The defeated side will diminish, and the winners will have near total control. And that will not turn out well in the end, because you NEED more than one point of view on things.

But it's not racial, not at all.

No, it's ideological, and if you don't believe that it's only because you haven't realized it on your own yet.



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: loam



Hillary: "You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about. That's why I believe if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and/or the Senate, that's when civility can start again..."


That is disturbing.

Seriously.


The toothpaste is NOT going back into the tube.

Here is an interesting read:



Ever y Single Thing is Now Different: The Kavanaugh moment is not done. It is just beginning.

What has happened is nothing more than the abandonment of classical liberalism by the left wing of the Democratic party, an abandonment the intelligentia of the left executed decades ago, but that has now been joined by the cultural leadership of the left as well. P. Andrew Sandlin of the Center for Cultural Leadership says this abandonment is the direct cause of the cultural Marxism all around us, a trend that we as conservatives now ignore to our own peril. The creeping of this element into the pop culture is the reason things will never be the same, not the mere opportunism of a few political bullies like Cory Booker and Kamala Harris.

I do believe the right has often been guilty of exploiting and weaponizing certain news events or outlier stories, and I wish from the bottom of my heart that I believed this despicable attempt to ruin Judge Kavanaugh’s life was a bottoming event in our political discourse. But I believe it is “the new normal,” not a bottom, and that the worst manifestations will not be in a Senate Judiciary Committee, or a heated campaign (both of which are bad enough), but will be in our businesses, our lives, and our communities, until these vestiges of cultural Marxism are soundly defeated.

Conservatives have claimed (rightly) for some time that it would be quite difficult to win the war on terror if we could not label it and identify it for what it is – Islamic jihadism. I would say that right now, in the present context, conservatives will have a very difficult time surviving in this culture if we cannot identify, accurately, the battle in which we find ourselves. Well-meaning people of faith frequently comment that we must avoid getting sucked into the culture war. Good luck with that. You’re in it. You’ve been made to care. And no head-in-the-sand-ostrich routine is going to save you now. We are locked into an existential battle for the future of western civilization. A romantic clinging to the idea of neutrality, denying the antithetical frameworks by which both sides see the human person, the human condition, and the nature of a free society, will lead to one side’s victory, and the other side’s annihilation. That is the reality in which we now live.


It's a long read, but sums up this thread perfectly.


edit on 9-10-2018 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry




posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Doesn't the Constitution afford every citizen a vote regardless of who they are? I wasn't aware that someone could decide another citizen doesn't have the right to vote. Sounds unconstitutional if you ask me, but who cares about the Constitution right now, it doesn't really jive with your ideas at the moment, right?
edit on 10/9/2018 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10/9/2018 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 06:13 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I hear the same thing from members like yourself every day on the boards. Are you disturbed with yourself?



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

We have half a nation saying things like, "Resist by any means necessary." They will resist this administration, everything he says, everything he does, and everything he hopes to do, because HE is divisive. Think about that...

The only thing Trump has to do with the divisiveness of this nation is that he is the target of the people intent on being divisive.



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: poncho1982




But it's not racial, not at all. No, it's ideological, and if you don't believe that it's only because you haven't realized it on your own yet.


It's racial.


If you would have heard the insults my ex Hispanic wife endured and she was born and raised in Lubbock, you just haven't realized it on your own yet.

Ever experienced the pleasure of "driving while black" yes it's racial and getting worse not better. And the hatred will destroy the nation; if it weren't for the T&C, the overt racism would be as prevalent on ATS as stormfront.


edit on 9-10-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 06:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Doesn't the Constitution afford every citizen a vote regardless of who they are? I wasn't aware that someone could decide another citizen doesn't have the right to vote. Sounds unconstitutional if you ask me, but who cares about the Constitution right now, it doesn't really jive with your ideas at the moment, right?


Well, the SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled that no Constitutional right is without measured limitations. Most states don't allow felons to vote (lookup felony disenfranchisement).

The 14th Amendment declares "rebellion" as an act for which someone may legally have their right to vote removed. So already what I'm suggesting here is seeing a bit of an open door to walk in through.

The 15th states the right to vote may not be "denied or abridged on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude..." Hmm, no mention of not allowing it should one's social merits be found utterly lacking and their behavior be deemed abhorrent....

The 19th and 26th amendments add the second of the two genders into the mix and then add age as a prohibited measurement by which to deny someone the vote. Again, though, nothing removes "rebellion" from the list of measures which can definitely lead to someone being legally disenfranchised.

The US Constitution contains NO guaranteed right to vote. It states that states can be punished for restricting the vote selectively based on certain criteria (race, religion, gender, etc), but nowhere in it does it say "The right of the people to vote must not be infringed" because it is, at it's heart, a privilege first and foremost.



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: poncho1982
...yes it's racial and getting worse not better...


How much worse?

Worse than the 1860s or 1960s?



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: loam



Got me, I don't see the dogs being unleased, or slave ships or white only restaurants etc...

It amazes me that people try to claim we are sliding back towards pre-civil rights times, for such a horrible country (as they like to claim) seems like hundreds of millions of people are doing pretty well by most any measure.



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
a reply to: loam



Got me, I don't see the dogs being unleased, or slave ships or white only restaurants etc...

It amazes me that people try to claim we are sliding back towards pre-civil rights times, for such a horrible country (as they like to claim) seems like hundreds of millions of people are doing pretty well by most any measure.



Without their cookie cutter hyperbole, they have nothing. If you went back into the 60s and brought a black man or woman from that era to today's America and showed them the "atrocities" happening today in the US, they'd fall down laughing at how sickeningly cowardly and thin skinned today's "civil rights champions" are compared to those from eras in which actual racism actually existed.
edit on 9-10-2018 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: underwerks


The Republican Party isn’t conservative anymore, they’re extreme nationalists.


Who was the last liberal on a ticket for president?


Bernie Sanders, but the fascist Hillary dealt him out.
edit on 9-10-2018 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Here is the problem with your reasoning. You're generalizing the nation as becoming more racist on just one person's experience in just one city. This whole thing started as a way to demonize Trump and the Republicans, cast them all as racists. I am not saying this kind of stuff doesn't happen, but it's definitely being drummed up by MSM to create division and attack right leaning people. Meanwhile, incidents involving racism against whites is swept under the rug.

For the record I am not white, and I have had no problems with racism, especially in Texas.

You want to see an extra level of crazy added? White ANTIFA members attacking other white people for being white. I am surprised this isn't a thread. This happened recently in uber liberal Portland.

Video no commentary

Commentary by Anthony Brian Logan


Commentarty by Tim Pool
www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

The left hates America and the founding principles of America. They are openly at war with those principles. This isn't the democrats of old who thought a little more government could ensure due process for all, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The new democrat party (which was born during the obama years) views due process, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as fundamentally flawed. They view it as protecting the white man and the patriarchy. They don't want to talk about policy, they don't want to talk about ideas. They want dissent gone from the discussion.

Don't believe in open borders? You obviously are a racist.
Don't agree with climate change alarmism? Science denier.
Don't like abortion on demand? PATRIARCHY!
Don't agree with redefining the word marriage? Bigot homophobe!
Don't think trump colluded with russia? Russian bot!
Don't want to date a trans person? Transphobe!
Don't want to shut down the speech of people you disagree with? Fascist!
Would like facts to back sexual allegations? Victim shamer! You support rapists!
Support the second amendment? Child killer!
Wary of allowing mass migration from war torn areas due to a violent religion? Islamophobe.
Think cops try to do the right thing most of the time? Racist!
Believe that the free market will sort out net neutrality? Corporate apologist.

I could go on and on and on. How do you reason with that? You can't, it simply must be defeated. They are trying to sink the ship. You're not going to stop them from doing so by pandering to them. You'll just fuel their cause.

By no means is the right perfect and great. They have their share of loons, but those loons aren't at the pinnacle of power in the party and driving policy decisions. But more importantly, they're not reducing the discussion down to ad-homs.

Let's reverse those positions and look at the opposing arguments:
Believe in open borders? You don't have a country without borders.
Agree with climate change alarmism? Good for you, but you're wrong.
Like abortion on demand? Baby killer!
Agree with redefining the word marriage? There are many ways to accommodate LGBT without redefining words.
Think trump colluded with russia? But you have no evidence.
Want to date a trans person? Have at it.
Want to shut down the speech of people you disagree with? Speech you don't agree w/needs protection.
Facts not required to back sexual allegations? I hope no one accuses you of something down the line.
Don't support the second amendment? The second amendment protects the rest of the amendments.
In favor of allowing mass migration from war torn areas due to a violent religion? That doesn't seem wise.
Don't think cops try to do the right thing most of the time? Head on down to a police no-go zone.
Don't believe that the free market will sort out net neutrality? Government creates monopoly's not the other way around.

One side allows debate (even if they aren't going to be convinced themselves) the other doesn't want it at all. It's a critical point in our nation's history and if we want to continue existing as a nation, we must encourage debate and discussion.


ETA:
Before you accuse me of setting up a straw man, these are actual responses I have personally received when trying to have real discussions with leftists. About one in twenty discussions gets past their ad homs. The vast majority of the time I get blocked by them after I don't cower in fear of their ad-homs. I'm always grateful to have one of the discussions that doesn't devolve into ad-homs.
edit on 9-10-2018 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: poncho1982

Thing is that it wasn't exactly racial then, either.

Back then, it was very much an ideological divide between two different ways of life. Those manifested in ways that divided us along racial lines, just like we're being divided again along racial, gender, and similar lines now, but the real struggle was and is ideological against competing ways of life.



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Sounds like you're trying to split hairs in order to justify your unconstitutional ideas. The constitution does not allow someone to take someone else's voting rights away simply because they don't meet an arbitrary merit system.

Not surprising though, the whole point of this whole political circus is to make people such as yourself and the left extremists and willing to take other people's rights away. Sounds like you're falling in lockstep with what they're going for. Sad.
edit on 10/9/2018 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2018 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Essentially, he's right though. Voting is a privilege, not a fundamental right. It is a social convention that the society you live in agrees upon and sets the rules for. You do not get to vote simply because you breathe, and if you were all on your own, voting would be useless. I mean, sure you could vote in your society of one, but it would still be a social convention to the society of one and you would be setting the rules under which you get to vote. If another person showed up, you'd expect them to follow your rules, assuming you allowed them to vote.




top topics



 
33
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join