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.

 

Unamerican people need to leave America

page: 7
102
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by stmichael
 


What does your jealously with people who are rich have to do with Natural Rights? Certainly you are free to envy the rich if you choose, but how does this apply to Natural Rights?




posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Light of Night
 


They are still held as such regardless of time or whom declared such. Those truths were carried forward into the Constitution in the form of the Bill of Rights. Since those are amendments, we the People have every means lawfully to revoke anything we no longer hold to be relevant. Even if that is done, those rights protected against a tyrannical government are not revoked, just no longer protected. The right remains.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   
People should only come to a country legal ...I would never go to a nation without having being Legal to prove I did it by the good grace that I am . I also think that I could never live in a nation other than america . I think everything I need or want is right here..Fresh water, Good food , movies , hard sweaty Solft-Ball games on Friday night . Nothing beats this ..and rock music .



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by daskakik
 



The founders used this ideal on which to build this nation. They called it the American Ideal. If you agree with it you can consider yourself an American. If you don't you could still call yourself American but not because you embrace the American Ideal. Those that do embrace it can/will think of you as unamerican.


I never once said I disagree with it. The rate it is going though I'm starting to see the governments thought to why they are labeling strict constitutionalists potential threats.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Light of Night
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Ahh yes, lets attack the poster now.

Read the Bill of Rights, it clearly states in several amendments with the clear language of "the right of the people".

So you can dissect my post because I used the wrong words and also want to attack my credibility because I said I wasn't going to post anymore but decided to keep posting. Doesn't really matter to me. It's just the internet.

Edit -

Still doesn't make you right.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by Light of Night]


You are the one declaring all who disagree with you as having an inability to comprehend. It is then valid to point out your own failings in not just comprehension, but in communication as well. Each and every word should be given significance, not just in posts here, but most certainly in The Bill of Rights, and simply because those Amendments mention the right of the People is not nearly enough evidence to assert they are rights being granted. This is your delusion.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
your a fool. We haven't had any rights in decades. We're all just slaves. You me, everyone. We are slaves. America is unamerican.

If you wan't inalienable rights your going to have to start a war and kill every wealthy status quo fool who has spent the better part of the last century insuring that they have 99.9 percent of all the wealth and influence in our country.

Our government is a scam. We don't have two parties, we have 1. We don't have news we just have propeganda for the left and the right. We don't have a chance to persue happiness. If we try we will be jailed. fined. ridiculed. eliminated. Anyone who isnt towing the party line and making the richy riches even richer is going to be put out. The only hope of restoring america is to destroy the entire system and rebuild it from the ground up. Anything short of that will be a hoax. Nothing will change. No problems will be solved. We will continue in perpetual slavery and most of us are just too stupid and brainwashed to even realize it because "This is america! we have inalienable rights!" yeah right. go try your freedom of speech and say some bad stuff to cheney and see how fast your tasered and incarcerated. If you ask me, your as much a part of the problem as them because you push this mythology of freedom that hasn't existed in my lifetime.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Light of Night
reply to post by daskakik
 



The founders used this ideal on which to build this nation. They called it the American Ideal. If you agree with it you can consider yourself an American. If you don't you could still call yourself American but not because you embrace the American Ideal. Those that do embrace it can/will think of you as unamerican.


I never once said I disagree with it. The rate it is going though I'm starting to see the governments thought to why they are labeling strict constitutionalists potential threats.


And with government sycophants such as yourself, it should be clear why strict Constitutionalists view government as a threat. Indeed, you have willingly used the term "strict Constitutionalists" to describe those who are insisting that rights are not granted by Constitution, and in doing so, only continue to make your opponents arguments, and undermine your own.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
The Constitution Of The United States Of America is the very foundation for which Americanism ideals, ideaologies, thoughts, national ordinances were all based and conceived from thus decreeing it the "Law Of The Land". As it contains and clearly writes provisions for how this Government should be ran and not ran.

Your rights are guaranteed to you are clearly written into the Constitution. Some from a certain standpoint will say that no, there are no such thing as individual rights protections and the doc merely gives the Federal Government the authourity to order the State/Commonwealth to afford these rights to you when it pertains to matters of legal and court proceedings. Personally I can challenge that school of thought as saying simply the following : "For those rights for which you claim cannot apply for others shouldn't apply to you either"

That gets people thinking and asking "Does the Constitution apply to me?" in short yes it does any for anyone else to say it doesn't or don't is dead wrong and is trying to deny you those rights.

They apply to all alleged suspected terrorism suspects, detainees, foreign nationals, (I gotta find the post that completes this phrase, until then I'm leving this blank).

Government will only see freedoms such as an obstruction in the sole event it's plan is to torture, detain indefinately without charge or rit of legal counsel, commit mass genocide, commit treasonist acts, commit a coup d'tat, have dictatorial aspirations, seeking to advance a racial-isque agenda, seeking to enslave it's populous, seeking to bring forth Armegeddon or The Apocolypse.

We must stand for those that cannot or do not have a leg to stand on their own. Or else it makes us these evil idiots who care for no one.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I hate patriotism. Evolve or die.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Light of Night
Read the Bill of Rights, it clearly states in several amendments with the clear language of "the right of the people".


You just crumbled your very argument. "The right of the people", meaning that the rights belong to the people, not the Government nor the Constitution.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
Its the product of a free mind being able to not be bound by the edges of a piece of paper and be able to understand that we, as Americans hold our Declaration of Independence in high regard, then we must still hold true to the words penned upon it.


Agreed. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the rest of the amendments, etc., however, only apply to the US. Our Constitution and the rights detailed and protected by the amendments do not apply to citizens of other countries any more than the constitution of Rwanda applies to American citizens.


If I have at some point declared that that statement comes from the Constitution, I will fix it and that is my mistake for not proofreading.


Indeed you did. May have been a mistake, but you did. It's in the part I quoted if you need a reference point to start looking for it.


My point was to show, as others have the progression at which the People came to the Constitution. The proclamation of self-evident and unalienable rights are declared upon in the Declaration of Independence, but is that where they stop? Do they not carry forward as still held self-evident and being held unalienable?


They do, but unfortunately it doesn't really matter much outside of our borders. Citizens of other countries are subject to their laws, not ours. We cannot impose our laws or beliefs on another country without hostile takeover, and I'm sure we both prefer not to go that route.

Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and all men being equal does not in any way mean that our Constitution applies to anyone who is not a US citizen. Those inalienable rights belong to everyone. The rights protected by our Constitution, on the other hand, only apply to our citizens. Other countries with similar language in their constitutions obviously will have similar protected rights as well, but due to their own constitutions. Not ours. Constitutions are sources of law. People outside of a laws jurisdiction are not subject to it. This is why we aren't subject to the laws of France and they aren't subject to ours. (And yes, I am just coming up with countries off the top of my head while typing.
)



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
I say we Americans and Europeans should blame ourselves for making the rest of the world into a such as cesspool. It isn't just the rich people who's exploiting brown people; it's everyone who can't realize that they can stop it from happening so that the exploited won't come back for revenge.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   
Rights only exist that can be protected, just like laws only exist that can be enforced.

You made a terrible contradiction in the OP. You say that atheist and christian alike have this right, because it's given by nature or God. What?

What about Manifest Destiny?

What about the Native Americans we decimated and deceived? Did we apply these "God given" rights to these "savages"


Natural Law is a theory, and system of belief, originally posited by Aristotle. It's fun to think about, makes ya feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but doesn't really exist in the real world.

Equality is an ideal, not a reality.


...oh wait, but I must be an uneducated, idiot sycophant, correct?



Nature judges not.

Right and wrong exist only in the minds of sentient beings.

[edit on 4-5-2010 by unityemissions]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   
I love hearing people who grew up in America screech about their rights being "taken away". Try growing up were I did, in the Soviet Union. By the time it collapsed, I was thirteen. I had stood in milk lines on Saturday mornings (had to get there at 4am to even have a chance at getting any), had seen police arrest people simply because their neighbor had accused them of "attempting subversion of soviet ideals", had ingested more propaganda (TRUE propaganda, not the soft-journalism you call CNN/FoxNews), had two families moved into my own family's cramped apartment (against our will) as part of the Soviet plan to provide a home for all, and had seen government cronies get the lion's share of state goods from the city's warehouses, leaving the rest of us with little.

All of these things are violations of man's inalienable rights, not some piddly little issue of who gets to claim unemployment or who filled out the right paperwork to cross the border.

Despite all of the disgusting and disheartening acts I witnessed growing up, I am still a proudly avowed socialist, and believe in helping others in the process of helping myself. I only wish this attitude were more common, rather than the partisan bickering over pointless, idiotic talking points that seems to dominate American culture.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



You are the one declaring all who disagree with you as having an inability to comprehend. It is then valid to point out your own failings in not just comprehension, but in communication as well. Each and every word should be given significance, not just in posts here,...


It's the truth. The evidence is posted in this thread for all to see.


...but most certainly in The Bill of Rights, and simply because those Amendments mention the right of the People is not nearly enough evidence to assert they are rights being granted. This is your delusion.


What??


This is exactly what I was talking about. You are taking the Bill of Rights and applying "what" you think it says. This is YOUR delusion.


And with government sycophants such as yourself, it should be clear why strict Constitutionalists view government as a threat. Indeed, you have willingly used the term "strict Constitutionalists" to describe those who are insisting that rights are not granted by Constitution, and in doing so, only continue to make your opponents arguments, and undermine your own.




No, every point I have made backs up what I have said. You insist that your rights are not granted by the Constitution, when the evidence is quite clear that the Constitution does grant you rights.

The only argument that is being undermined is your own. Again you "think" the constitution says something that it doesn't. It's that simple.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 





Agreed. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the rest of the amendments, etc., however, only apply to the US. Our Constitution and the rights detailed and protected by the amendments do not apply to citizens of other countries any more than the constitution of Rwanda applies to American citizens.


This statement is demonstrably false and there are People who while in the U.S, but not a citizen of the U.S., rely upon the same rights as do most citizens. I say most, since clearly there are some who wish to diminish inalienable rights and declare them civil rights.

Your earlier argument that our Constitution does not extend to other countries is only true in the sense that our Constitution places no restrictions on what other governments do regarding rights, but once in this Land, all People have the same rights, and of course, they do so in other lands, even if they might be told differently.




They do, but unfortunately it doesn't really matter much outside of our borders. Citizens of other countries are subject to their laws, not ours. We cannot impose our laws or beliefs on another country without hostile takeover, and I'm sure we both prefer not to go that route.


All People who consent to be governed are subject to the laws of such government. Citizens of other countries, when residing in the U.S. are subject to the laws of the U.S. and as such have no right to abrogate or derogate the rights of others, regardless of how that may play in their own country. By asserting that all people have the same rights is not in anyway imposing our Constitution on other nations. People are free to believe what they want, but as long as there are those willing to defend the Natural and inalienable rights of all People, there is always the good chance that those who have acquiesced to tyranny will rise up and zealously assert their own Natural Rights, and once securing them, jealously guard them.




Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and all men being equal does not in any way mean that our Constitution applies to anyone who is not a US citizen.


You keep stating this, yet it remains demonstrably false, and there are reams of case law that involve a person not a citizen of the U.S. who has quite clearly relied upon their inalienable rights to due process of law.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jenna
Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and all men being equal does not in any way mean that our Constitution applies to anyone who is not a US citizen. Those inalienable rights belong to everyone. The rights protected by our Constitution, on the other hand, only apply to our citizens. Other countries with similar language in their constitutions obviously will have similar protected rights as well, but due to their own constitutions. Not ours. Constitutions are sources of law. People outside of a laws jurisdiction are not subject to it. This is why we aren't subject to the laws of France and they aren't subject to ours. (And yes, I am just coming up with countries off the top of my head while typing.
)


Right the US constitution does not extend outside your borders but it does apply to all within them even if they are not US citizens because they are in it's jurisdiction.

Now given that the American Ideal which acknowledges these inalienable rights as belonging to all humans this means that Americans who believe in the American Ideal also extend these rights to everyone in the world. In this way it shapes the way Americans see others even if they are not US citizens.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


My stance is that of the OP though. How can one proclaim equal justice under the law, at which the law is ultimately derived from the Constitution; which by the argument of the OP was heavily drawn upon Natural Law theory, be able to deny someone that very basic tenet we hold?

I am by no means saying that the United States should impose its laws upon other nations. Since we are sovereign, I hold that other nations that are of the People are also sovereign. The people of the other nations have the ability to create a Government in which they see fit, regardless of how much it contradicts our own way of viewing sovereignty.

An example of my stance is such: If a person broken the law, i.e, came to this country illegally and has no intentions of becoming a legal citizen, then they are still afforded due process and equal justice. Do they not also deserve to be able to present their case to their peers and declare them guilty without even consideration that they innocent until then?

I do not propose we go to Mexico or Canada and force our laws and protected rights upon them, I am merely arguing that how can we proclaim equal justice for all (except people we don't want to include), then deny them that equal justice?

"It protects rights that we, as humans find self-evident." - If this is what you were referring to as me saying that the statement 'self-evident' came from then you have projected and drawn that conclusion on your own. The statement shows how the Constitution protects rights that were previously stated to be self-evident.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 



You just crumbled your very argument. "The right of the people", meaning that the rights belong to the people, not the Government nor the Constitution.


No, I didn't. The Bill of Rights grants us those rights. As it has been mentioned earlier when the Bill of Rights did not exist the government started taking away these so called "rights". If the bill of rights did not exist we would not have these rights.

Therefore the constitution grants us these rights.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by die_another_day
 


Sorry but it's a dog eat dog world. Why in Gods name should I blame myself for being successful and my family thriving through generations? Sorry but if the "brown" man cant keep up thats on him, Im not going to slow down so he can catch up.



new topics

top topics



 
102
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join