| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
January 9th 11, 09:42 PM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave,alt.religion.christian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.news-media
|
|||
|
|||
The Constitution is the basis for sound government of the people,by the people and for the people.
On Jan 8, 5:30*pm, dave wrote:
On 01/10/2011 12:18 AM, John Smith wrote: However, all that said, it would be wise to add an amendment which would remove the patriot act and make sure such evil does not threaten Americans ever again ... Regards, JS - Adherence to the 4th Amendment would kill - the Patriot Act, no modification needed for that. 'Special-Dave', So you cite the US Constitution 'as-is' when it suits you; and say it has to evolve and change when it doesn't. ~ RHF |
|
#2
January 10th 11, 01:50 AM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave,alt.religion.christian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.news-media
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Constitution is the basis for sound government of the people,by the people and for the people.
On 01/09/2011 01:42 PM, RHF wrote:
On Jan 8, 5:30 pm, wrote: On 01/10/2011 12:18 AM, John Smith wrote: However, all that said, it would be wise to add an amendment which would remove the patriot act and make sure such evil does not threaten Americans ever again ... Regards, JS - Adherence to the 4th Amendment would kill - the Patriot Act, no modification needed for that. 'Special-Dave', So you cite the US Constitution 'as-is' when it suits you; and say it has to evolve and change when it doesn't. ~ RHF . . No. That's close but not exactly correct. I never said it needs to evolve. I said it is intentionally vague and the definition of certain trick words like "unreasonable" change. |
|
#3
January 10th 11, 01:53 AM
posted to rec.radio.shortwave,alt.religion.christian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.news-media
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Constitution is the basis for sound government of the people,by the people and for the people.
On 1/9/2011 5:50 PM, dave wrote:
... No. That's close but not exactly correct. I never said it needs to evolve. I said it is intentionally vague and the definition of certain trick words like "unreasonable" change. You mean such truths as, "No change is needed to my right to free speech, freedom of religion, right to keep and bear arms, etc." If you, you are correct, it would be UNREASONABLE to attempt to weaken to take away any of the God given natural laws ... Regards, JS |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
