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.

 

CA Senate bill mandates gay history in schools

page: 16
24
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili

Originally posted by Annee


Oh true.

My mom was cussed out more then once - - because she didn't move fast enough to suit some people.


So what? Some people are aholes in life.

Get used to it.

Less emotion and more logic would do you a world of good.


Less emotion? I'm not calling people aholes - - you are.

Logic? That minorities have to fight for equality - rights - tolerance?

Fortunately - - - there are enough Logical Majority - - - to recognize the rights of minorities.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Annee because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 





That minorities have to fight for equality


So are you suggesting that the " rights ' that a minority fought for outweigh the thoughts and views, like/dislikes of others? That the minority rights supersede others Constitutional rights?

( just trying to clarify)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Recognition of rights and giving them more rights than others are 2 vastly different things.

The rights of one do not supercede the rights of another, which you seem to think is ok for some odd reason.

You whined that people told your mom to hurry up....who cares what others say?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Annee
 





That minorities have to fight for equality


So are you suggesting that the " rights ' that a minority fought for outweigh the thoughts and views, like/dislikes of others? That the minority rights supersede others Constitutional rights?

( just trying to clarify)


Equal Rights outweighs the majority. Yes!

Where exactly is this "supersede" part of the Constitution - - - that says Majority rules?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


mob rules

we live in a country where mob rules

and not everyone has the same ideals

which means rights are trampled on for the rights

everyone loves to think that us was founded as a democracy which is nothing but mob rule

we are a constitutional republic which means the everys rights have equal value.
edit on 18-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I was asking if you thought minority rights superseded the Constitutional rights. Is reading comprehension not a strong suit for you? Your opinions are not indicative to a full understanding of Constitutional rights.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Annee
 


mob rules

we live in a country where mob rules

and not everyone has the same ideals

which means rights are trampled on for the rights


Please provide where in the Constitution it says Mob Rules.

Exactly which rights are being trampled on. Excluding denying equal rights by religious belief.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Annee
 


I was asking if you thought minority rights superseded the Constitutional rights. Is reading comprehension not a strong suit for you? Your opinions are not indicative to a full understanding of Constitutional rights.


OK - - and I asked you to provide where it does.

Anyone who throws out the Constitution in an argument - - - - needs to first provide and prove their point and reason for using the Constitution as argument.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Exactly which rights are being trampled on.


How about the rights of a business owner to not have to install obscenely expensive elevators in order to meet ADA requirements on the off chance someone in a wheelchair enters their business and wants to see the 2nd floor?

That is a blatant violation of the owners private property rights.

You mentioned the A.D.A. in a previous post, care to hear some horror stories about that right infringing piece of legislation?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


lets take the last election or any election in the past 200 years

50 to 60 million voted for their guys but the minorities had no choice but to live by the outcome.

thats mob rule.

heres another mob rule the rich are continually assaulted and their private property is taken from then without their say so they have no choice.

in this country we have no choice but to do whatever they say to do.

try not paying taxes,etc
edit on 18-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment 3 - Quartering of Soldiers. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

www.usconstitution.net...

Here are the first 5 of the Bill of rights. Now, Ill bring my question down to your level.

Does minority rights in your eyes, supersede anything listed above?

A simple yes or no will suffice.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili

Originally posted by Annee

Exactly which rights are being trampled on.


How about the rights of a business owner to not have to install obscenely expensive elevators in order to meet ADA requirements on the off chance someone in a wheelchair enters their business and wants to see the 2nd floor?



What's really pathetic - - is - - you are serious.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Annee
 


Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



Where is anyone denying the right of religious belief? No one is denying the right of anyone to believe what they want.

The 2nd amendment? How does that fit this thread?

What the 2nd amendment actually means is - - - the people are the government - - they have the right to defend themselves against the government - - in such case the government tries to over rule the people.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Here are the first 5 of the Bill of rights. Now, Ill bring my question down to your level.



Bit of overkill there.

No there is no simple Yes or No.

Enough with the personal insults or I'm going to report you.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Anyone can post anything from the Constitution.

Try making one point in your own words - - using the Constitution as your support and reference.

Thank you.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Report me then.....they will only laugh. As I have not made in derogatory comments towards you. Simple observations only. You have nothing to argue, nothing but baseless opinions. You have been countered numerous times on this thread, and you choose to not learn something.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Annee
 


Report me then.....they will only laugh. As I have not made in derogatory comments towards you. Simple observations only. You have nothing to argue, nothing but baseless opinions. You have been countered numerous times on this thread, and you choose to not learn something


Actually you've made several - - and no they won't laugh about it.

You have made no specific point - - in regards to bringing the Constitution into this debate - - - other then posting the Bill of Rights (1 thru 5).
edit on 18-4-2011 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Actually, I questioned you on whether or not minority rights supersede Constitutional rights? There doesn't need to be any more elaboration on that question presented.

You base your arguments on how it makes you " feel ", not on factual data. Emotionally driven stances are pointless. Emotion never solved anything.



Actually you've made several


Care to show proof? Other than your opinion ?
edit on 18-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
No one should be forced to tolerate another group... but we all 'should' do it on our own. There is no positivity that will grow from hate. This is of course my opinion. I believe we should all strive for good but being forced into it is wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 13  14  15    17  18 >>

log in

join