View Poll Results: Which is more crucial

Voters
46. You may not vote on this poll
  • Freedom of Religion

    26 56.52%
  • Mandate to Evolve

    10 21.74%
  • Both are equally crucial

    10 21.74%
Page 60 of 94 FirstFirst ... 1050585960616270 ... LastLast
Results 591 to 600 of 938

Thread: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

  1. #591
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,299
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    examples ------>i asked you question-------->can people be made to do things against their will, if they have none nothing wrong????
    Show me where it is done, then we can talk. Your source completely failed to do that since it was a bunch of lies. Why do you keep trying to divert from your source being wrong?

    can you please explain why the 13th amendment i sited was published in federal,state, and private books for over 65 years as part of the constitution?
    Already handled in the thread I linked.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #592
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    So Madison was a King who dictated the Constitution to the People of the United States? They got no say at all?? They all agreed with his interpretation of the Constitution 100%?!?


    You know, I usually only award 3/3 but in this case you get 4/3 ...

    sorry ...your argument does not stand up under fire, again for you when it comes to the Constitution Madison is king on its meaning....why.

    becuase he laid its framework months before the convention.

    he took the notes of the convention,
    he spoke more than anyone,
    put more proposals forth then anyone,
    stayed after the convention and worked on a committee,
    wrote vastly more about the constitution in his lifetime, and lived longer then any other founders and wrote about the constitution has decisions were being made on it over 45 years later
    wrote the bill of rights
    wrote federalist papers and many works on the Constitution itself
    Last edited by Master PO; 08-05-13 at 03:04 AM.

  3. #593
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Show me where it is done, then we can talk. Your source completely failed to do that since it was a bunch of lies. Why do you keep trying to divert from your source being wrong?
    can you just answer a simple qusetion, it appears ...not



    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Already handled in the thread I linked.
    you give a link ....i asked again, why does it appear for over 65 years in books from every level of government and private, ...all your doing is handing off a football to me.......whats your answer do you think to the question i asked?

  4. #594
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    it is therefore of necessity left to the discretion of the National Legislature, to pronounce, upon the objects, which concern the general Welfare, and for which under that description, an appropriation of money is requisite and proper. And there seems to be no room for a doubt that whatever concerns the general Interests of learning of Agriculture of Manufactures and of Commerce are within the sphere of the national Councils as far as regards an application of Money.

    as stated before the general welfare is the 18 powers of congress.

    congress has the power to pronounce upon objects which concern general welfare, and appropriate money for it....18 powers

    are you taking the word "learning" in there and saying that means "education from government", and this gives them authority ?
    It wouldn't even take that word to make the quotes fit the intended use. The Fed doesn't have any schools or school buildings or (underage) students. In fact, I'm not even sure any state has that and I know Missouri doesn't, so your continued misunderstanding is once again noted.

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    here you left this out, its the last para!

    "No objection ought to arise to this construction from a supposition [assumption] that it would imply a power to do whatever else should appear to Congress conducive to [promote/assist] the General Welfare. A power to appropriate money with this latitude [freedom] which is granted too in express terms would not carry a power to do any other thing, not authorized in the constitution, either expressly or by fair implication[implied]

    translation:

    no object ought to be taken from powers of taxation, to the assumption that it would imply a power to do whatever else should appear to Congress to promote the general welfare. a power to appropriate money with freedom which is granted to by the constitution would not carry a power to do any other thing, not authorized in the constitution, either expressly or implied.
    As usual, your translating abilities are rather lacking.

    Hamilton expressly states that Congress can appropriate money for the general welfare - period, end of story - and was not intended to be limited by the following clauses. If you had actually read the entire quote that would be plain as day. He is also saying that other actions (more than just spending money) promoting the general welfare is not part of the powers of Congress under that clause, which is what the last paragraph says. Giving schools federal money for education is an appropriation of money for the general welfare as provided in Article 8, Clause 1, plain and simple. Spending money for R&D and other aspects of education is also allowed, which is why there was HEW, which was later split into Dept of Education and Dept of Health and Human Services.
    Last edited by MoSurveyor; 08-05-13 at 03:32 AM.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  5. #595
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    sorry ...your argument does not stand up under fire, again for you when it comes to the Constitution Madison is king on its meaning....why.

    becuase he laid its framework months before the convention.

    he took the notes of the convention,
    he spoke more than anyone,
    put more proposals forth then anyone,
    stayed after the convention and worked on a committee,
    wrote vastly more about the constitution in his lifetime, and lived longer then any other founders and wrote about the constitution has decisions were being made on it over 45 years later
    wrote the bill of rights
    wrote federalist papers and many works on the Constitution itself
    You just don't get it, do you? Or rather, you don't WANT to get it because it's as plain as day to everyone else and it flies in the face of your precious theories. This is like discussing evolution with a Young Earther!

    Since he wasn't the only signatory he is not the only and last source for it's interpretation.

    The constitution stands on it's own by it's own words as does every other contract ever written. No ONE signatory of a contract can decide what is and isn't meant by the contract, only the courts have that power.

    To top it off, Hamilton, which was also a signatory, interprets it differently - so quit acting like Madison is the one and only source or opinion that matters. Madison wasn't the King of America and he doesn't get to dictate from the grave what the constitution means. Get over it!
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  6. #596
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,202

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    i know this i have stated it before...HOWEVER the state will NOT give parents their tax payer money for different schools.
    So what? The state will not give people that have NO KIDS their money back. So cry me a river.
    [QUOTE=ernst barkmann;1062139969]
    many parents cannot afford to send their children to a different school and pay for it, so they are mandated then to a public school, ..i say give the parents vouchers, and let them go elsewhere, however the public schools fights this idea. [QUOTE]
    I say if they "can't afford it" they don't want to. If it was that important to me i would afford it.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    they are not having any bias, they are stating i dont want my child taught something...how is that a bias?
    The reason they don't want their kid taught this particular something is because of bias.

  7. #597
    Supreme knower of all
    CLAX1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Houston, in the great state of Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,202

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    examples ------>i asked you question-------->can people be made to do things against their will, if they have none nothing wrong????
    Yes, I am forced to pay taxes. I am forced to obey many laws that prohibit things that aren't wrong.

  8. #598
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    Yes, I am forced to pay taxes. I am forced to obey many laws that prohibit things that aren't wrong.
    yes, but taxes are legal, and a law which prevents the physical damage of a person or property before it could happen is legal by statutory law.

    example, its against the law to store propane near a source of heat, becuase it could explode and cause damage.

    however laws which force me to engage in actions i do not wish to engage in are unlawful.

    if i wish to engage in something with is not a right like driving i have to play by the states rules.

    but the state mandating my child must receive schooling and taking my tax money to do it, and then teaching them things which are against my beliefs.. thats wrong.

    its not different then the schools teaching homosexuality is wrong in the 50's is wrong.

  9. #599
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    [QUOTE=CLAX1911;1062147359]So what? The state will not give people that have NO KIDS their money back. So cry me a river.
    [QUOTE=ernst barkmann;1062139969]
    many parents cannot afford to send their children to a different school and pay for it, so they are mandated then to a public school, ..i say give the parents vouchers, and let them go elsewhere, however the public schools fights this idea.
    I say if they "can't afford it" they don't want to. If it was that important to me i would afford it.

    The reason they don't want their kid taught this particular something is because of bias.

    this idea that parents should pay taxes to support a public school and then the public schools does things the parents disapprove of, does not sound like the nation of the founders to me.

    it does not matter and its not your call to tell something what they must be taught, people can be bigots, racist, or whatever, its not a crime, and no one has the authority to tell another person what to do.

  10. #600
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    It wouldn't even take that word to make the quotes fit the intended use. The Fed doesn't have any schools or school buildings or (underage) students. In fact, I'm not even sure any state has that and I know Missouri doesn't, so your continued misunderstanding is once again noted.

    As usual, your translating abilities are rather lacking.

    Hamilton expressly states that Congress can appropriate money for the general welfare - period, end of story - and was not intended to be limited by the following clauses. If you had actually read the entire quote that would be plain as day. He is also saying that other actions (more than just spending money) promoting the general welfare is not part of the powers of Congress under that clause, which is what the last paragraph says. Giving schools federal money for education is an appropriation of money for the general welfare as provided in Article 8, Clause 1, plain and simple. Spending money for R&D and other aspects of education is also allowed, which is why there was HEW, which was later split into Dept of Education and Dept of Health and Human Services.
    the general welfare is the 18 powers of congress, how many times must i say this.......and one thing i do not believe you will understand is...the founders created a nation where the federal government would not be in the personal life's of the people.

    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    black text is a power of congress, while red text is a duty of congress.

    as for the translation, lets here from someone else on the subject.

    Alexander Hamilton had a slightly more liberal view of the term general welfare. He has stated in several occasions that the general welfare clause in the taxing clause of the Constitution gives the government authority over almost anything defined as the general welfare. The argument he seems to make is that the general welfare clause gives the government unquestionable ability to do what it wants as long as it is in the general welfare, good for everyone. The problem is that he is the only Founder to seem to have that view. Madison, Jefferson, and the whole of the Federalists Papers disagree with him. He even disagrees with himself sometimes as he was the author of many Federalist Papers as well as with this quote:

    "The only qualification of the generality of the Phrase in question, which seems to be admissible, is this–That the object to which an appropriation of money is to be made be General and not local; its operation extending in fact, or by possibility, throughout the Union, and not being confined to a particular spot"

    "No objection ought to arise to this construction from a supposition that it would imply a power to do whatever else should appear to Congress conducive to the General Welfare. A power to appropriate money with this latitude which is granted too in express terms would not carry a power to do any other thing, not authorised in the constitution, either expressly or by fair implication"

    It appears from this quote even Alexander Hamilton was arguing that the general welfare phrase only applies to the powers authorize to Congress in the Constitution. Again we see the founders had a clear view of this phrase even when they seem to contradict themselves.



    Secondly what did the Federalists Papers say about the term general welfare? These documents written to defend the Constitution from the detractors in the states also do a good job of explaining the intent of this term.

    It has been urged and echoed, that the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it… For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars… But what would have been thought of that assembly, if, attaching themselves to these general expressions, and disregarding the specifications which ascertain and limit their import, they had exercised an unlimited power of providing for the common defense and general welfare? (Federalists #41)


    http://ajbulava.wordpress.com/2011/0...neral-welfare/
    Last edited by Master PO; 08-05-13 at 04:17 PM.

Page 60 of 94 FirstFirst ... 1050585960616270 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •