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: 9
102
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by sos37
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


I don't agree with your diatribe. "Natural Rights" are a concept. An opinion of what you THINK you have, of what you deserve. Yes, I said an OPINION.

In reality you are born with nothing. You deserve nothing. You are given nothing except what those around you will give to you.

You scream and rant about "rights" that all people have imbued in them simply by being born. There is only one right that you have at any one time and that is the right to resist the mandate of the existing law (order).

These "inalienable" rights you like to trumpet aren't imbued upon you simply because you are a born human being - that's the most SINGULAR CONCEITED, ARROGANT statement made, next to "We are the only life in the universe".

The rights you enjoy now are due to soldiers who fight enemies who would take those "inalienable rights" away from you. And there will always, always be someone who will be ready to take away your rights. Rights are BORN out of superior resistance. And if at any time a superior force were to take over this country, you would quickly see that those "rights" you quack about being imbued on everyone would be taken away.

Try arguing that you have inalienable rights with the man who has a weapon pointed at your head. If he demands you do something or not do something, the only right you have is the right to resist his order. Try excercising your "inalienable" rights in a prison camp under the order running the camp. Again, the only right you have to excercise as a human being is resistance. You may die for excercising that right, depending on who oppresses you, but you are free to excercise it.



Wow, someone in this argument with some common sence. Nice..........
Thank you for that post. It's the only post that makes it real.




posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   
This is making my HEAD HURT

Let me get this straight

the "Natural Laws" Whether I believe in them or not, are traced to the following three: Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness. And that WE the people have set up the government as it is.

The other side states that the Constitution Gives us these rights instead of them being innate since birth.

So let's say EVERYONE really is given these 3 natural rights.

However, in the USA, there are LAWS and RIGHTS and PRIVILEGES that we the people have created by the USA FOR THE USA.

Sure, anyone can have life liberty and pursuit happiness anywhere. But in the USA, if you want to pursuit happiness (in this case, live here) You should pursuit it the way that WE THE PEOPLE have written it.

It would be UNAMERICAN to deny someone to apply for citizenship. But it would definitely be AMERICAN to kick illegal immigrants out of our country. We have the right to pursue OUR happiness too. And since our laws have something to do with our "happiness," People BREAKING our laws are infringing on OUR happiness.

Basically what I'm trying to say is this:

Everyone can live the way they want, can do whatever they want, and indulge however they want. However, there are consequences for every action you take.

There is nothing unamerican about not letting illegal immigrants invade our country. It is their choice to infringe on our laws, we're not forcing them to. That is their method to pursuit their life. Their liberty to come here illegally. Their way of life. It is also our right as citizens of this country, to deal with them to do so since they are breaking our laws.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Yeah yeah this is all knowledgable and such but the true fact of our problem is that mist Americans think that these inalienable rights are going to do something about our present govt. our rights do nothing for us. You have to know how to use them to acquire a good sense of their true worth.
So go ahead and say all Americans have these rights and don't know about it. Americans know they have rights, itsthe first out if their mouth while being arrested for crimes that usually have no injured party. We are under attack because my fellow Americans don't know crap. Your rights mean absolute s h i t if you don't k ow what they are or when to use them.

So yeah our rights are natural woohooo. But our govt is still
completley corrupt. and if 80% of America is dumbed down to the point where they think voting is the way to cure our problem. Hahah it's too funny. The only real right we have is to stand up as a whole to our govt. that has grown tyrannical and overpowered. A system that has and continues to purposely devide our nations people and steal our freedoms and exchange it for entertainers who gloat in their riches as our true society breaks further down.

Wake up you tools the only right you truely have is to live happily. And if your going everyday waiting for someone else to do something about it then boohoo cuz this is all ur getting.

Fight back for f u c ks sake. Take out their signal and see what living really is. Or you'll die like millions before you. Your all dead anyway. You just dont get our reason for being here on earth. But continue utilizing those natural rights and see where it gets you because in the end those rights are to make you more confident in being a human. Showing how you can be a human and not a sheep. It's a frame a mind not just a list if things you can do. Be aware, be a human you idiotic braInless monkeys. Prove your worth your skin like true humans let alone Americans. It's just a way to devide the
people of earth even more. Devide and conquer or combine and evolve.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by SpectreDC
 


I take it that when you say 'American' you are referring to the United States of America?

America is bigger than the U.S., remember?



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


Jesus Time and time and time again. It isn't about what you or I believe it is about the reality and facts of the situation. It doesn't matter what I was taught or who taught me or whatever.

The fact is that without the Bill of Rights none of the rights that the Supreme Court has ruled that we have and that are stated in the Constitution would not exist.

You can believe whatever you want, that is your right that is guaranteed by the Constitution. But just because you believe something to be a certain way doesn't actually mean that it is that way.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Ptenjakin
 





the "Natural Laws" Whether I believe in them or not, are traced to the following three: Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness. And that WE the people have set up the government as it is.


Not even close. Natural laws existed long before any document acknowledging their existence was written.




So let's say EVERYONE really is given these 3 natural rights.


Everyone was born with more than just three natural rights.




However, in the USA, there are LAWS and RIGHTS and PRIVILEGES that we the people have created by the USA FOR THE USA.


We the People did not at any point ever create laws, or rights, We the People have empowered a legislature to legislate laws, but keenly aware of the political machinations of tyrants, strict controls were placed upon that authority to legislate. Privileges are created, this much is true.




Sure, anyone can have life liberty and pursuit happiness anywhere. But in the USA, if you want to pursuit happiness (in this case, live here) You should pursuit it the way that WE THE PEOPLE have written it.


There are no guidelines written anywhere by Constitution that tell people how to obtain happiness, only that they have the right to it, and even this is not so much "written" by Constitution, (that comes from the Declaration of Independence), as it is understood.




It would be UNAMERICAN to deny someone to apply for citizenship. But it would definitely be AMERICAN to kick illegal immigrants out of our country. We have the right to pursue OUR happiness too. And since our laws have something to do with our "happiness," People BREAKING our laws are infringing on OUR happiness.


You come close to hitting upon truisms with this statement, but application for citizenship has nothing to do with Natural Rights, and citizenship is a privilege not a right.




Everyone can live the way they want, can do whatever they want, and indulge however they want. However, there are consequences for every action you take.


Bingo! There is all truth in this statement.




There is nothing unamerican about not letting illegal immigrants invade our country. It is their choice to infringe on our laws, we're not forcing them to. That is their method to pursuit their life. Their liberty to come here illegally. Their way of life. It is also our right as citizens of this country, to deal with them to do so since they are breaking our laws.


Again I would have to agree with this statement. The federal government has been mandated by Constitution to protect the borders of this nation, and controlling the flow of immigration is arguably part in parcel to that protection.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link   
I often wonder what anyone of us would do if we were from the countries where people migrate from. I know what I would do if I had a family ( which I do ).

I would take a blow up raft across the ocean. I would cross the boarders and work to send money back, etc. I think sometimes people point their finger at the wrong people....people who are doing exactly what we all most likely would do if we were in a similar situation.

On a personal note, I can contest to the fact that most people I know don't like foreigners because they are simply intolerant to different kinds of people, whether said people are a different race, practice a different race, or root for a different sports team. ( I know, sad )

So, in the pursuit of happiness, I blame not the people who are doing what they can to provide for their families or selves. I blame the people or organizations that give them an incentive to do so.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
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.


Way to not follow the conversation and be completely off-base at the same time. Disagree with me if you like, but realize that I was pointing out that citizens of other countries are not bound by our laws or our Constitution and indeed they are not. I've never heard of an instance of someone in Zimbabwe claiming their 5th amendment right to not incriminate themselves or their 8th amendment right to not be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.

Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and all men being created equal are the inalienable rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. Those are the rights that all human beings are supposed to have by virtue of being alive that should not be infringed upon in any way provided that no one else's rights are being trampled on. The rights detailed in the amendments to our Constitution, on the other hand, are not inalienable. The evidence is all around you. And really, when you get right down to it, there is no such thing as an inalienable right. Every right you can think of can be taken from you one way or another.

Citizens of North Korea, for example, do not have the same rights and freedoms we do here regardless of what you believe. Should they have them? Absolutely. Do they? Absolutely not. If you require evidence, take a gander at how their last presidential election went. Oh wait... You can believe that they have the same rights and freedoms as we do, unfortunately that does not make it so.


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.


When residing in the US, yes they are subject to our laws. When they are not residing in the US, they are not. The rights guaranteed us by our Constitution do not apply to those outside the US, it is only within our boundaries that those rights are guaranteed. Outside our boundaries those rights are in many cases either severely diluted or completely nonexistent.

Even those who do not consent to be governed are still subject to the laws of the land they live in. I might decide that I refuse to give my consent to be governed any longer and that all laws passed by the United States no longer apply to me. I might then decide to kill my neighbor because I like his house better than mine and since I accept no governance there are no laws standing in my way. I will still be subject to the law of the land and will discover this when they arrest me for murder and haul me off to jail. All my claims of not consenting to their governance will not prevent my arrest, trial, or conviction. Nor will they keep me out of jail.


By asserting that all people have the same rights is not in anyway imposing our Constitution on other nations.


I disagree. By saying that citizens of other countries have the same rights we are guaranteed by our Constitution when they do not, you are effectively saying that our Constitution applies to them when there is no way it can. Our Constitution is a legal document that puts forth the basic laws of our country. As such it cannot apply to anyone who is not within it's jurisdiction. Citizens in other countries are outside of the jurisdictional boundaries for our laws, Constitution included.


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.


Inside the US, yes. Outside of it, no. And that seems to be where you are confusing what I am actually saying for what you think I'm saying. Inside our borders, citizens of other countries are indeed subject to our laws because they are within the jurisdiction of said laws. The reverse, however, is not possible.

Citizens of other countries do not and cannot have the same rights we are guaranteed by our Constitution because they are outside of the US. The only way it is possible for them to have the rights we have is if it is guaranteed in their own constitutions or other laws. They would then have those rights not because our Constitution says they do, but because the laws of their own countries guarantee them those rights.

You forget, our country is extremely young in the grand scheme of things. Citizens of other countries do not have whatever rights they have in that particular country because of us. It's rather narcissistic to claim that they do.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Technically you are right, and I admire your spirit; You are addressing an argument as old as the USA. Let more immigrants in, and the America of 10 years from now will not be the America of 10 years ago. (Just as the America of the 50's wasn't the America of the 30's or 10's, etc) For the most part, it has just been the 'already heres' vs. the 'want to be heres'...and the 'already heres' like things Just The Way They Are. But we always get a new wave of new people, and the makeup changes, and it's not better, or worse, just...different...America!!!!

It's all a matter of DEGREE, ultimately. Times have changed, and this time it isn't 'Irish' or 'Poles' or 'Somalis'...all of whom came here legally with respect for the law.
Now we have people doing anything, lie, steal, cheat, whatever, to get in - and in massive numbers. I understand their desperation, but...

Flood the country with immigrants and you dilute the population with more people, and their need for services, education, medical care, etc in a disproportionate amount to what the current socioeconomic base can afford, monetarily and societally. It disrupts on many levels.

Imagine 5 unemployed, uneducated distant relatives from the other side of the planet who do not speak English move into your house. It is ultimately a disservice to you and your relatives to have been so generous. Everyone suffers. Resentments build. You go broke feeding them, they are frustrated by the fact that there aren't jobs for uneducated people who don't speak the language. They desperately take a job, ANY job, because they are actually good people who want to work and succeed, but they work 'under the table' and erode the minimum wage jobs, hence pulling down the entry-level job market for your neighbor's kids, and the local unskilled workforce, who depend on these jobs as part of the overall balance of our economic system. Your relatives are seen as 'parasites'. You feel terrible. So do your relatives. Then the trouble starts. Like too many hamsters in a cage, you start chewing each others limbs off.

The key is management of this number coming in - not cutting off, not 'opening the floodgates'. Every other country does this with a few exceptions (who are paying for this dearly as a result).

It is a shame to turn people away, but there's only so much room on the boat!


[edit on 4-5-2010 by TheSearchforSpork]

[edit on 4-5-2010 by TheSearchforSpork]



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Let me make one thing clear Immigration laws such as the one recently passed in Arizona do not take the the inalienable right to life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness away from illegals, if anything the protect those rights of both them and American citizens! Immigration laws need to be enforced in this country to protect both Americans and Immigrants legal or otherwise.

Illegal immigration hurts both sides.

Illegals in this country do not pay taxes yet put a strain on the infrastructure of this country.

Illegals benefit from tax payer dolors in some states “cough cough California” leaching money from tax payers and abusing the system.

Due to the fact that Illegals are not eligible for employment in the united states they only get low paying jobs that leave them living in poverty and poverty leads to crime!

Illegals take jobs away from American citizens! Now I know the argument all to well, they take low paying crap jobs that most don't want, but its not the crap job or the fact that they require hard work that keep Americans from taking these jobs its the low freaking pay. Let these companies experience a profit loss for a few months with no cheap labor and wages will raise and you will see Americans working these jobs then but ill be damn if I will bust my but for pennies a day!

Illegal Immigrants are exploited and abused by these employers due to there status in this country companies know they can get away with paying them cheap and working long hours since labor laws don't apply to some one who technically does not exist.

As for those of you who have complained about native Americans well they came here from some where else also so technically there not native! They crossed the barren straight at some point and came to this contention. If only the native Americans had the ability to enforce such laws maybe they would still control this land I prefer not to make there same mistake and welcome invaders with open arms and then try to do something once its to late.

Immigration from south of the border both legal and illegal has been nothing but a thorn in this country's side along with there culture they have brought drugs, violence and gangs to this country Hispanic gangs have found there way to places such as Nashville TN and Denver CO these to cities have recently been inundated with gang violence all from Hispanic gangs with in the last Ten years!

The best option for all involved is strict immigration laws that allows everyone who wishes a chance at the American dream a chance to come here!



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Ptenjakin
 





the "Natural Laws" Whether I believe in them or not, are traced to the following three: Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness. And that WE the people have set up the government as it is.


Not even close. Natural laws existed long before any document acknowledging their existence was written.




So let's say EVERYONE really is given these 3 natural rights.


Everyone was born with more than just three natural rights.




However, in the USA, there are LAWS and RIGHTS and PRIVILEGES that we the people have created by the USA FOR THE USA.


We the People did not at any point ever create laws, or rights, We the People have empowered a legislature to legislate laws, but keenly aware of the political machinations of tyrants, strict controls were placed upon that authority to legislate. Privileges are created, this much is true.




Sure, anyone can have life liberty and pursuit happiness anywhere. But in the USA, if you want to pursuit happiness (in this case, live here) You should pursuit it the way that WE THE PEOPLE have written it.


There are no guidelines written anywhere by Constitution that tell people how to obtain happiness, only that they have the right to it, and even this is not so much "written" by Constitution, (that comes from the Declaration of Independence), as it is understood.




It would be UNAMERICAN to deny someone to apply for citizenship. But it would definitely be AMERICAN to kick illegal immigrants out of our country. We have the right to pursue OUR happiness too. And since our laws have something to do with our "happiness," People BREAKING our laws are infringing on OUR happiness.


You come close to hitting upon truisms with this statement, but application for citizenship has nothing to do with Natural Rights, and citizenship is a privilege not a right.




Everyone can live the way they want, can do whatever they want, and indulge however they want. However, there are consequences for every action you take.


Bingo! There is all truth in this statement.




There is nothing unamerican about not letting illegal immigrants invade our country. It is their choice to infringe on our laws, we're not forcing them to. That is their method to pursuit their life. Their liberty to come here illegally. Their way of life. It is also our right as citizens of this country, to deal with them to do so since they are breaking our laws.


Again I would have to agree with this statement. The federal government has been mandated by Constitution to protect the borders of this nation, and controlling the flow of immigration is arguably part in parcel to that protection.


I want to apologize for my wording. I'm not exactly the best with my vocabulary.

Anyway, I just basically want to say that, as the country of USA, although there may be birthrights that every person on this earth has, we have laws that we've established.

You can say it would be unamerican to deny someone the right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is a point where rights come in conflict with privilege and I believe a balance of both is necessary to have a functional society.

It is a right to pursuit happiness in the USA and anywhere else in the world, but it is a privilege to be a legal citizen here or anywhere else.

Anyway, I don't believe in all of those other birthrights. The only one I believe in is that you are allowed to do whatever the hell you want, but be prepared to pay the consequences of your actions.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 





I've never heard of an instance of someone in Zimbabwe claiming their 5th amendment right to not incriminate themselves or their 8th amendment right to not be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.


And yet you ignore that a Zimbabwe National can, and indeed will rely upon his right to due process of law when in the U.S. and his or her lack of U.S. citizenship will not preclude that right. Way to follow the conversation and be completely off base at the same time.




The rights detailed in the amendments to our Constitution, on the other hand, are not inalienable.


Say's who?




The evidence is all around you. And really, when you get right down to it, there is no such thing as an inalienable right. Every right you can think of can be taken from you one way or another.


In spite of your assertion that the evidence to support your claim is all around me, you much like others who wish to dismiss inalienable rights as evident can only point to the fact that there are tyrants willing to disobey laws. That there are those willing to abrogate and derogate rights only further serves as evidence that they are indeed rights, (take note how they are not called maybes, or wrongs, or even lefts, but called rights, because what we do that is Natural and Just, we do by Right), and always those who wish to diminish the sanctity of Rights, will argue in the same breath of their existence while attempting to declare them non existent.




Citizens of North Korea, for example, do not have the same rights and freedoms we do here regardless of what you believe.


You keep bringing up North Korea as if this is a proper model by which we should all understand rights. It is a tyrants argument, nothing more, nothing less.




Should they have them? Absolutely. Do they? Absolutely not.


They do have them! Absolutely so, and if and when they decide, those North Koreans, to rise up and take their rights, then they will finally enjoy them. No benign tyrant will do this for them, no enlightened intellectual will get them their rights, only they and their will shall accomplish this.




Oh wait... You can believe that they have the same rights and freedoms as we do, unfortunately that does not make it so.


Oh wait...you can take as much pleasure as you want in the existence of tyranny, it will never make Natural Rights any less real.




When residing in the US, yes they are subject to our laws.


All people everywhere are subject to laws, this does not mean people are subject to legislation, as legislation is not law, but merely evidence of law, and if it is law, then regardless of citizenship, all people are subject to it.




I disagree. By saying that citizens of other countries have the same rights we are guaranteed by our Constitution when they do not, you are effectively saying that our Constitution applies to them when there is no way it can.


By continually asserting that Rights can only be granted by Constitution you are, as do others, ignoring the 9th Amendment, which is more than enough evidence to refute your assertions that Rights only exist by grant of government.




You forget, our country is extremely young in the grand scheme of things.


You presume too much regarding my memory.




Citizens of other countries do not have whatever rights they have in that particular country because of us. It's rather narcissistic to claim that they do.


I have never made any such assertion, and it is your own arrogance that has led you to this presumption. People do not have Rights because I or anyone else says so, they have Rights because they do. It is really that simple.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
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'm wondering how many people have actually read Aquinas, Hobbes, or the rest when it comes to natural law and natural rights. They are generally speaking not the same thing and vary greatly depending on who we're talking about.

Hobbes didn't believe unlimited rights was a good thing, he saw it leading only to basically an unending war with everyone trying to impose their will on every one else. He also found the idea of finding natural rights in natural law to be a preposterous notion because as he saw it, according to natural law all men had the right to take everything including things owned by others. Natural law according to Hobbes is anarchy. Complete and utter anarchy. Under his version of natural law, our Constitution would not work and there would be no equal justice unless by that you mean an eye for an eye.

Aquinas on the other hand pretty much took everything back to God, so God's law is natural law. His version is slightly better in that it follows the golden rule of do unto others, but not everyone buys into God's law and it's worth pointing out that God's law back in the day included stoning those who were accused of witchcraft. Not convicted, accused. No right to a fair trial there.

Locke only believed there were three natural rights. Life, liberty, and estate. Pain believed that governments only had power because the people gave them power. The list goes on... And that's just a short summary of all they had to say on the subject, which in some cases was quite lengthy. So which version of natural law and natural rights are we speaking of? Who's version are you going with?


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?


This is where it's really a tricky area, and hopefully I word this so that you understand what I mean. Yes, I believe everyone has the right to defend themselves and the right to a fair trial. However, the rights of our citizens must come before the rights of those who are not citizens when speaking of issues within our own borders. Our country and government must take care of it's own before it takes care of those from other countries. Without the citizens of this country, there would be no government or country to speak of. It's in their best interests to protect our rights and freedoms and not infringe on them for the benefit of those here who are not citizens and have no inclination to become legal citizens.


"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.


It was the statement immediately proceeding it where you said "The Constitution", followed by the sentence you quoted here that starts with "It". The word "it" is typically used as reference to the object previously spoken of and in this case "it" would be referring to the Constitution. Perhaps it was my own confusion, but it appeared that you were referring to the Constitution when speaking of things being self-evident. Thus my comment.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Now that was good! I expected you know what and you surprised me and I always enjoy a surprise like this one. The "Mister Know-it-all's" are thick around here but you got to remember that it takes all kinds.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   
I'm not sure how this thread got on the topic of immigration. I think they should just put a minefield all along the border. If people want to come here illegally they blow up. There's no cost to the state for enforcing immigration law because there's nothing left to send back over the border. The vultures will handle everything nicely.

back to the topic of rights.
I was born to poor parents, I myself am poor. The poor of the USA are nearly invisible. they have no say. If a homeless man gets stabbed by a criminal and lays dying in the streets, nobody will come to his aid. Nobody cares about the poor. In fact the rich would prefer if all the poor would die because they aren't even paying taxes. On top of that our entire system is designed to make it nearly impossible for a poor man to become rich or for a rich man to become poor. It's hopeless desperation. Look at Goldman Sachs. Even as the entire economy was going down in flames they were profiting from everyone elses misfortune. So the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. I gotta say If your not frustrated by the impossibility of the situation then you don't really understand what it is to have nothing and to see the people with everything working so hard to keep it that way. Tha'ts why I hate the rich. That's why I think the rich are to blame for everything and all the problems of our modern world can be solved simply by eliminating the rich and redistributing their obnoxiously huge wealth back to the people.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying I am going to DO anything or that anyone else should go DO something rash, like assassinate all the CEO's of Goldman Sachs. I'm just saying that this is how the world is and its very very bad. So if you tell me I have all the rights to life liberty and happiness that the richy riches enjoy, YOU ARE DUMB. There's 2 Americas. One for the rich. and one for the poor. And The poor have no rights.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
And yet you ignore that a Zimbabwe National can, and indeed will rely upon his right to due process of law when in the U.S. and his or her lack of U.S. citizenship will not preclude that right.


When in the US, yes. Outside of it, no. It's not that difficult to grasp what I'm saying here so the only option I have left to consider is that you are intentionally misunderstanding me.



Say's who?


Says all the countries around the world where people are tortured and killed for trying to speak their minds or walk around uncovered while being female.



In spite of your assertion that the evidence to support your claim is all around me, you much like others who wish to dismiss inalienable rights as evident can only point to the fact that there are tyrants willing to disobey laws.


How can I explain this so that you'll understand.. What you and I see as a tyrant, may not seem so to the people living under said tyrant's rule. Laws that do not exist in other countries cannot be broken there. Free speech does not exist in places where there is no constitutional or legal safeguard to guarantee it to the people living there.


You keep bringing up North Korea as if this is a proper model by which we should all understand rights. It is a tyrants argument, nothing more, nothing less.


Actually, that's the first time I mentioned North Korea. I'm intentionally naming different countries each time I name one.


They do have them! Absolutely so, and if and when they decide, those North Koreans, to rise up and take their rights, then they will finally enjoy them. No benign tyrant will do this for them, no enlightened intellectual will get them their rights, only they and their will shall accomplish this.


Tell that to the people living in North Korea. Your belief that they naturally have a right does not mean they have it. I believe everyone naturally has the right to their own unicorn. Does that mean everyone has a unicorn? No it doesn't.


Oh wait...you can take as much pleasure as you want in the existence of tyranny, it will never make Natural Rights any less real.


Yes, knowing that human beings are tortured and killed for disagreeing with their government really just tickles me pink. I'm as pleased as punch over here just thinking about it.


I'll ask you what I asked the other poster. Natural rights according to whom?


All people everywhere are subject to laws, this does not mean people are subject to legislation, as legislation is not law, but merely evidence of law, and if it is law, then regardless of citizenship, all people are subject to it.


All people everywhere are subject to their own laws, not the laws of the US unless within our borders. The more of your posts I read the more convinced I'm becoming that you intentionally avoid what is actually said and intentionally misunderstand it when you can't avoid it.


By continually asserting that Rights can only be granted by Constitution you are, as do others, ignoring the 9th Amendment, which is more than enough evidence to refute your assertions that Rights only exist by grant of government.


How does that guarantee our rights to citizens of other countries while they are in those other countries?


I have never made any such assertion, and it is your own arrogance that has led you to this presumption. People do not have Rights because I or anyone else says so, they have Rights because they do. It is really that simple.


Yes, I'm being arrogant because I realize that rights granted by our Constitution only apply to those subject to our Constitution. How very arrogant of me.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 11:10 PM
link   
S&F, articulate and to the point.

When you look at it from this perspective, it becomes quite clear what's going on. The state is trying to tell us that our rights are temporary, granted to us as a privilege when the exact opposite is true. We have these rights because we exist; they aren't negotiable.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 11:21 PM
link   
I have one bit of advice, related to the topic at hand, and to whom it may concern. Others have made the point that as long as there is a state mantaining it's authority through violence we have not achieved true freedom under natural and self evident law. I tend to agree.
The way I see it is this. The world at this point is approaching ever higher levels of totalitarianism, but we could be near a turning point. Don't ask me how I know this, because I don't know this, this is just what I feel to be likely based on my intuition. My advice is this, stop paying attention to politics, or the affairs of government on the global, national, state, or even local leve. Start paying atttention to the affairs of government on the individual level, that individual being you.
Keep your eyes on your life and the lives of those whom you know and make sure that your inalienable and self evident rights are not being trampled. Whenever you personally have these rights, or the rights of those whom you know, trampled, sound the horn and do whatever is in your power to do to fight the trampler. Unless you are willing to die for your rights, and the rights of your loved ones, we will never overcome tyranny as a species.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Jenna
 


The thing that makes a right inalienable is that they can't be taken, they can only be given away. If the entire people of North Korea stood up today and said, you no longer have the right to take our lives (and were willing to die for that cause... a paradox I know), then Kim Jong Ill would be utterly powerless to mantain his "right to kill them" granted to him by the law.



posted on May, 4 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   
i agree with you i think every one deserves to be part of everything in this world ..who are we to put limits on or what anyone can be part of in this world let us not forget that every soul in this world was givin to this world ...and let us also not forget that the very first inhabitants on this land we call U.S.A were here be4 us and were killed so that we "Americans " can have "natural freedom" it is indeed sad that we forget that this world belongs to us all and power and control and...greed is and will be apart of it so long as we are human ...but i guess thats natural ...so my question is who are the real imigrants ..?



p.s pardon my spelling

love Nephi



new topics

top topics



 
102
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join