Judge Barrett hearings...

[spat]

I agree with you that morally you have a right to your wallet. However things get stolen every day. Stolen goods don't automatically return themselves to their morally rightful owners though.

Immoral things happen all the time. Rape. Murder. Theft. Etc.

Nobody has a moral right to commit any of the above, yet there are plenty of victims, and being morally right didn't stop it from happening. Ideal vs. Function. I believe the only rights that you REALLY have are the ones you assert and bring into reality, anything less is just wishful desires.

You are confusing rights with power.

Rights are absolute.

Power is what you can take.

Your notion invalidates the very concept of rights. By your definition it is impossible to violate someone's rights, because if you can violate them they must not have been rights ?

 

[cgrutt]

You are confusing rights with power.

Rights are absolute.

Power is what you can take.

Your notion invalidates the very concept of rights. By your definition it is impossible to violate someone's rights, because if you can violate them they must not have been rights ?

We are so fucked. Nobody (except a few) "gets" it.

 

[SonOfSun]

You are confusing rights with power.

Rights are absolute.

No they aren't. Different people in different parts of the world have different "rights". If they were absolute, different people wouldn't have different "rights", everyone would have the same "rights" and that's not the case.

Power is what you can take.

Your notion invalidates the very concept of rights. By your definition it is impossible to violate someone's rights, because if you can violate them they must not have been rights ?

To a degree yes, I'd argue power matters more than rights. With enough power you don't need to be worried about what some group arbitrarily determines their rights are or aren't. If you can make rights moot, do they actually matter?

Not saying this is a good thing, but it's reality.



EDIT: I think I'd generally agree with most people on here on the "rights" that you should have. Where I think we differ is that that my position is that unless you have the ability to make those "rights" a reality, you don't actually have them.

 

[cgrutt]

No they aren't. Different people in different parts of the world have different "rights". If they were absolute, different people wouldn't have different "rights", everyone would have the same "rights" and that's not the case.




To a degree yes, I'd argue power matters more than rights. With enough power you don't need to be worried about what some group arbitrarily determines their rights are or aren't. If you can make rights moot, do they actually matter?

Not saying this is a good thing, but it's reality.

Well I'd say anybody anywhere within the world has the absolute right to "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness". We born in America have the added benefit of having these Natural rights outlined and embedded in our Constitution. Others who were not as fortunate may not have them set forth in writing but nevertheless are enshrined with such rights as they are natural rights. God given rights. Afforded to all human beings no matter where they may reside. Now that's not to say there are regimes throughout the natural world that may not observe these Natural God Given Rights afforded to all human creatures throughout the world. And get this. Our Founding Fathers knew this thus created the greatest country of all humanity where people of all walks of life could come for salvation. “Give me your tired, your poor,/ Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”. Not too long ago families of all heritages were proud to come to America and become Americans. Lately it seems the soul of America has been lost.

 

[kev74]

The commie leftists are calling for court packing again.

Imagine the hilarity if Trump nominated 2 more Supremes tonight!

 

[Acer-m14]

Watched Amy's speech while at work .. AWESOME!!! ..

and my FB snowflakes are already crying LOL..

 

[Acer-m14]

 

[spat]

No they aren't. Different people in different parts of the world have different "rights". If they were absolute, different people wouldn't have different "rights", everyone would have the same "rights" and that's not the case.




To a degree yes, I'd argue power matters more than rights. With enough power you don't need to be worried about what some group arbitrarily determines their rights are or aren't. If you can make rights moot, do they actually matter?

Not saying this is a good thing, but it's reality.



EDIT: I think I'd generally agree with most people on here on the "rights" that you should have. Where I think we differ is that that my position is that unless you have the ability to make those "rights" a reality, you don't actually have them.

No, natural rights *are* absolute. That's what makes them rights. Every person everywhere in the world was born with exactly the same rights.

The people of North Korea have just as much right to criticize their leader as we do. Just because doing so will get them shot doesn't remove the right.

Just because your government doesn't recognize a right doesn't mean it ceases to exist.

Anything less than this means that you have *no* rights, just whatever privileges your circumstances allow.

 

[spat]

The commie leftists are calling for court packing again.

Imagine the hilarity if Trump nominated 2 more Supremes tonight!

He should so troll them.

"At the request of congressional Democrats we are increasing the number of justices to 11. I am nominating Trey Gowdy and Ben Shapiro to fill the new vacancies. We will vote to confirm them tomorrow...."

 

[Acer-m14]

He should so troll them.

"At the request of congressional Democrats we are increasing the number of justices to 11. I am nominating Trey Gowdy and Ben Shapiro to fill the new vacancies. We will vote to confirm them tomorrow...."

contact babylonbee with that idea .. i bet they can make it sound really really good and might push it 15 ... LOL ..

 

[spat]

contact babylonbee with that idea .. i bet they can make it sound really really good and might push it 15 ... LOL ..

Just imagine Gowdy and Shapiro on the court.

Oral arguments would be epic.

You could sell tickets.

 

[masterswimmer]

I'd prefer to see Trey Gowdy and Ted Cruz. Ben Shapiro can be #12 and throw in Candace Owens as #13 for diversity and really nice longevity to the appointment

 

[Acer-m14]

for 14 and 15 .. the hair solon owner that did Cruz's hair and that barber guy Karl Manke ,.. lets make it 16 Kristi Lynn Noem Gov SD

 

[masterswimmer]

for 14 and 15 .. the hair solon owner that did Cruz's hair and that barber guy Karl Manke ,.. lets make it 16 Kristi Lynn Noem Gov SD

Needs to be an odd #. Can't do 16

 

[Acer-m14]

we need a 17 .. who has a name ??

 

[spat]

we need a 17 .. who has a name ??

Dinesh D'Souza ?

James Woods ?

 

[pjzwtl]

Well seeing as it was already ruled on and scotus didn't choose to hear the case years ago, it would have to make its way through the courts all over again to even potential be heard by scotus

SCOTUS didn’t decline to hear SAFE it was withdrawn wisely when AS passed away.

 

[Phazer]

unless you have the ability to make those "rights" a reality, you don't actually have them.

Incorrect. Fighting tyranny to defend the ability to preserve and exercise natural rights is the essence of the founding of The United States.

 

[Saltwater60]

Gotcha. I may be wrong, been there before too many times, but now the potential to overrule the 9th circuit with the plethora of 2A cases from California pending could by default affect the safe act

Sure would be nice but don’t hold your hand over your ass waiting, it will get dirty.

 

[BuffNiag]

The commie leftists are calling for court packing again.

Imagine the hilarity if Trump nominated 2 more Supremes tonight!

Breyer won't make it through a second Trump term...

 

[4WHLDRFTN]

................

 

[GOPerfect]

Technically speaking everything in the past is Historic, 1 minute ago is now history.

Who knows for 100% sure if they would have carried it. That being said, I'd tend to agree with you though, I think most networks would have carried it.

History and historic are two different things...

Historic--------famous or important in history, or potentially so.

History--------- the study of past events, particularly in human affairs.

Completely different words and meanings.

 

[S&W Fan]

I'd prefer to see Trey Gowdy and Ted Cruz. Ben Shapiro can be #12 and throw in Candace Owens as #13 for diversity and really nice longevity to the appointment

Candace is a firebrand for sure but I think I’d rather see Niki Haley added to the list.

 

[GOPerfect]

Candace is a firebrand for sure but I think I’d rather see Niki Haley added to the list.

Off subject....

Trump will win next week, hands down.

In about three years, he will step down for medical reasons.

Mike Pence becomes President through default.

Mike Pence chooses Niki Haley as his Vice President.

Pence does NOT run for election in 2024, Niki runs and wins. Niki Haley becomes first Female President of these United States.

 

[masterswimmer]

Off subject....

Trump will win next week, hands down.

In about three years, he will step down for medical reasons.

Mike Pence becomes President through default.

Mike Pence chooses Niki Haley as his Vice President.

Pence does NOT run for election in 2024, Niki runs and wins. Niki Haley becomes first Female President of these United States.

I think you have an interesting theory percolating in there somewhere. I think if it were to go down as you said, and Trump had another great three years, Pence would name Ivanka as VP. Then she'd run as first woman President of these United States.

That would be the only way Trump would step down IMO.

 

[GOPerfect]

I think you have an interesting theory percolating in there somewhere. I think if it were to go down as you said, and Trump had another great three years, Pence would name Ivanka as VP. Then she'd run as first woman President of these United States.

That would be the only way Trump would step down IMO.

This could very well be also.

But hell, we gotta get through next week first.

 

[masterswimmer]

This could very well be also.

But hell, we gotta get through next week first.

In an honest and fair election I see next week as a landslide four more years.

My fear is that I don't foresee a fair election under any scenario. I'm incredibly nervous about the underhanded ability of the left. THEY WILL STOP AT NOTHING TO UNSEAT PRESIDENT TRUMP. He is their nemesis threatening to expose every single one of their treasonous, corrupt, unscrupulous dealings. They can't allow that under any circumstance. They'd rather see the USA fail first. They're proving it.

 

[S&W Fan]

Off subject....

Trump will win next week, hands down.

In about three years, he will step down for medical reasons.

Mike Pence becomes President through default.

Mike Pence chooses Niki Haley as his Vice President.

Pence does NOT run for election in 2024, Niki runs and wins. Niki Haley becomes first Female President of these United States.

Interesting scenario but most likely a Long shot at best. Only because IMHO we have only seen the tip of the iceberg regarding the rabid lefts actions. Once Trumps next four years come to a close we are going to see no holds barred actions to take control of everything the likes of nothing that we’ve ever seen yet.

 

[SonOfSun]

History and historic are two different things...

Historic--------famous or important in history, or potentially so.

History--------- the study of past events, particularly in human affairs.

Completely different words and meanings.

I did choose the wrong word there.

Everything in the past is part of history, but not necessarily historic.

 

[masterswimmer]

Interesting scenario but most likely a Long shot at best. Only because IMHO we have only seen the tip of the iceberg regarding the rabid lefts actions. Once Trumps next four years come to a close we are going to see no holds barred actions to take control of everything the likes of nothing that we’ve ever seen yet.

No holds barred in four years? What would you call a fabricated impeachment charging Trump with doing EXACTLY what they're guilty of doing? Or the rigging of elections in '16 and again in '20 with mail voting fraud? Or shutting down the world economy due to a systematic, planned release of a deadly virus? Or stonewalling every single attempt this administration has put together at bettering the USA?

I think no holds barred is in the rearview mirror.