its one of the most obvious dishonesties in constitutional scholarship.
You basically prove my point. You view one as a significantly worse removal of a right than the other. Which is fine. However, it doesn't change the fact that yes, our laws DO absolutely remove peoples rights due to past actions and due to an assumption of potential future action. The simple difference is whether or not there's enough political will to allow for said right to be removed.
There isn't currently as it relates to indefinite imprisonment.
There is in terms of removing the ability to keep and bear arms.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Last edited by Bob Blaylock; 06-18-14 at 11:13 PM. Reason: May Laurence Tureaud have compassion toward you. — http://tinyurl.com/LaurenceTureaud
The five great lies of the
We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.