• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Which is more crucial

  • Total voters
    40
  • Poll closed .
ernst barkmann said:
sorry will not work with me, dont even try.
Click to expand...

I don't care if it "will work with" you. You'll steal my money and you make all the excuses for it. But should some fella try to take YOUR lunch....well then it's hell to pay. I ain't gotta make it "work with" you, it's but plain truth. You'll steal my money for your kids. You'll steal my labor for your house, you'll use government gun against my prosperity to fund your own. But should some poor sap ever, and the Rock means EVER, dare suggest you sacrifice YOUR lunch...well then we're gonna hear about it. Carpet baggers...socialists in disguise.
 
Ikari said:
I don't care if it "will work with" you. You'll steal my money and you make all the excuses for it. But should some fella try to take YOUR lunch....well then it's hell to pay. I ain't gotta make it "work with" you, it's but plain truth. You'll steal my money for your kids. You'll steal my labor for your house, you'll use government gun against my prosperity to fund your own. But should some poor sap ever, and the Rock means EVER, dare suggest you sacrifice YOUR lunch...well then we're gonna hear about it. Carpet baggers...socialists in disguise.
Click to expand...

please provide how i steal your money?

please make it good.
 
ernst barkmann said:
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.

<snip - more quotes>

"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.
Click to expand...
Here Hamilton is talking about things other then spending money. The federal government does not have a school district it runs. It is doing nothing but spending money on education, which also includes coordination and research in education. (Spending money on research is also acceptable.) It is not localizing one area, it is spreading those funds out to every state of the union. All of this is 100% within the powers of Congress under the general welfare clause. Quit being dense and/or dishonest.
 
ernst barkmann said:
Hamilton lived only until 1804 when he was shot to death, ...Madison lived until 1836 and wrote on the Constitution almost to his death, and wrote many pieces of work on it.
Click to expand...
That didn't make Madison King of America with his interpretation the only contribution. Contracts to this day still stand on their own in court. They don't depend on what one signatory says was the intent of the contract when it was signed. Obviously Hamilton didn't agree with Madison and Hamilton also signed that contract along with dozens of other people, some of whom, no doubt, also disagreed with Madison's interpretations.
 
ernst barkmann said:
please provide how i steal your money?

please make it good.
Click to expand...

You make me pay for your schools. You make me pay for your parks that are predominately used by families. Families tend to use the roads more, but don't pay their proportionate share. Mortgages are subsidized through tax write offs for families and made up by higher taxes on single people. Tax write offs for kids put higher tax pressure on those not getting discounts because the kids will use resources that are publicly funded and those funds still need to be made, so higher taxes on single people to subsidize your kids. And a plethora of other tax write offs and other subsidization for your family and your kids at MY expense. But you're OK eating my lunch, so long as no one is nibbling at yours.
 
RGacky3 said:
As a steadfast and firm member of the radical left ... you're wrong.
Click to expand...
Well, that's no good, as anyone who isn't a complete, bald face, liar knows that you can't take a liberal's word for anything.
 
Dooble said:
Well, that's no good, as anyone who isn't a complete, bald face, liar knows that you can't take a liberal's word for anything.
Click to expand...

Or perhaps anybody who doesn't make such stupid, childish statements is just a liberal by default.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Here Hamilton is talking about things other then spending money. The federal government does not have a school district it runs. It is doing nothing but spending money on education, which also includes coordination and research in education. (Spending money on research is also acceptable.) It is not localizing one area, it is spreading those funds out to every state of the union. All of this is 100% within the powers of Congress under the general welfare clause. Quit being dense and/or dishonest.
Click to expand...



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 authorized in the constitution, either expressly or by fair implication.


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.
 
MoSurveyor said:
That didn't make Madison King of America with his interpretation the only contribution. Contracts to this day still stand on their own in court. They don't depend on what one signatory says was the intent of the contract when it was signed. Obviously Hamilton didn't agree with Madison and Hamilton also signed that contract along with dozens of other people, some of whom, no doubt, also disagreed with Madison's interpretations.
Click to expand...

excuse me....i said no one has written more of the constitution than Madison, laid its framework, months before the convention, when it came to constitution, no one has written more on it over 45 year after it ratification.

tell me, who have provide more information than Madison on the constitution...no one.
 
Ikari said:
You make me pay for your schools. You make me pay for your parks that are predominately used by families. Families tend to use the roads more, but don't pay their proportionate share. Mortgages are subsidized through tax write offs for families and made up by higher taxes on single people. Tax write offs for kids put higher tax pressure on those not getting discounts because the kids will use resources that are publicly funded and those funds still need to be made, so higher taxes on single people to subsidize your kids. And a plethora of other tax write offs and other subsidization for your family and your kids at MY expense. But you're OK eating my lunch, so long as no one is nibbling at yours.
Click to expand...


You make me pay for your schools.

schools are a state power, there is no federal authority in the constitution over schools, so any federal government in schools is unconstitutional.

states have the power to tax, for fire, police, schools, and other services which they provide, these are known has privileges provided by government.

government cannot take your tax money for these things, and not give the privileges that go with them.......if they tax you for them, they have to provide them to you, and they do if you have a child ,that child can go to school however, no one is exempt from paying schools taxes, even old people have to pay them, as my own mother even though she is 79, they make her pay, even though she has long pass sending kids to school, the reason government wants money for its operations, and they dont care who they get it from.




You make me pay for your parks that are predominately used by families.

state parks are legal, national parks are unconstitutional, read article 1 section 8 of the constitution, read the17th clause.

states take tax money which is legal to tax and create parks, which is another privilege to society the state has created.

Families tend to use the roads more, but don't pay their proportionate share.

how would you solve this problem have government monitor peoples driving?....taxes are use to create material goods...roads, buildings..... and services for the people. ....there is no equal share of usage, .....its based on do you get to use it and ...you do.


Mortgages are subsidized through tax write offs for families and made up by higher taxes on single people.

the federal government has no authority in mortgages..unconstitutional..it is only charged with paying ...............the debts , the powers the duites it has and the defense of america.......mortgages are not part of congress powers and duties.

states have the power to tax, and to create such tax legislation, and they can create tax write offs.


Tax write offs for kids put higher tax pressure on those not getting discounts because the kids will use resources that are publicly funded and those funds still need to be made, so higher taxes on single people to subsidize your kids.

you are not clear here, so i cannot comment on any federal power.

again states have the power to tax and spend money on infrastructure, and services for its people, its a legal power, how they spend it depends on the people of the state, this is were your vote really counts on who you send to your state legislature.


And a plethora of other tax write offs and other subsidization for your family and your kids at MY expense.

no federal authority under the tax laws to give certain people write offs and others none, unconstitutional, the founders wanted the tax structure of america to be uniform, ....not progressive as it is today.

there is suppose to be equally under the law, however our tax system is far from it.

states can tax many things, however they are supposed to base there taxes also on equality, however they dont, and many people pay taxes, and some pay none, and receive money from government freely from both federal and state.

But you're OK eating my lunch, so long as no one is nibbling at yours.[/QUOTE]

wrong, i am a constitutionalists, which means the federal constitution and state constitution have to be followed to the letter.

most of what the federal government is doing is unconstitutional, becuase the constitutions only grants the federal government 18 powers, and give them no jurisdiction at all out of d.c. or where a state and the federal government agree for buildings only.

many states are very liberal, and with that ideology, they wish to spend tax money for society of their state, however they dont look at cost, but only care about needs of people. which is bankrupting their states.......so if your state is liberal....there you go!

i dont want you money used foolishly...its your money,....... i want it spent wisely on things our society must have, not those things we just .......want and desire
 
Last edited:
CLAX1911 said:
This post would be of value of you lost anything. You don't. There is nothing wrong with teaching kids that bring gay is okay, just like there is no harm in teaching that it's okay to worship Buda.

The problem is that you think it's wrong, fine, think it's wrong, HOME SCHOOL . I am sorry you can't have your cake and eat it also. Teaching kids that something like homosexuality is wrong is about like teaching that religion is wrong. You should be outraged what if your kid was gay?

Yes it is in my favor, but if they were teaching that it was wrong to be a evangelical nut job I would have a problem with that.
Click to expand...

then stop stealing my tax money from me for schools, and then demanding i be taught your ideology.

government have no moral authority to teach there ideas.

government is composed of people...again people, just becuase they are elected, and some appointed by elected officials, does not give them power to institute their moral code on the people.

example:

you and i have a total different point of view on sexuality....and we never are going to eye to eye because we have different ideologies.

then i become governor of the state, and i use my power to make other people including you accept my ideology, thru the power of the schools system...is that right for me to do that..........no!

just becuase i am elected does not give me power to force on you..... my ideology.

elected officials are not gods, they have no power of force over people.
 
Last edited:
Gardener said:
Or perhaps anybody who doesn't make such stupid, childish statements is just a liberal by default.
Click to expand...
That's just wishful thinking on your part. Stop sipping the kool-aid. ;)
 
ernst barkmann said:
then stop stealing my tax money from me for schools, and then demanding i be taught your ideology.
Click to expand...
everybody pays taxes no matter what. If you don't want to this isn't the nation for you.
ernst barkmann said:
government have no moral authority to teach there ideas.
Click to expand...
they aren't.teaching ideas. Why would you put your kids in a public school if you don't approve.
ernst barkmann said:
government is composed of people...again people, just becuase they are elected, and some appointed by elected officials, does not give them power to institute their moral code on the people.
Click to expand...
You are right, the people have spoken, you lost. Home school your kids, you still pay taxes everybody does you aren't special because you don't want you kids to learn that it's okay to be gay.

You can't have cake and eat it too. You clearly support public schools by having your kids attend.
ernst barkmann said:
example:

you and i have a total different point of view on sexuality....and we never are going to eye to eye because we have different ideologies.

then i become governor of the state, and i use my power to make other people including you accept my ideology, thru the power of the schools system...is that right for me to do that..........no!
Click to expand...
That isn't what's occurring. Nobody is telling your kids to be gay or to accept gay people.
ernst barkmann said:
just becuase i am elected does not give me power to force on you..... my ideology.
Click to expand...
that isn't what is happening, the government, meaning the people have spoken, you are over ruled. That is why there are alternatives.
ernst barkmann said:
elected officials are not gods, they have no power of force over people.
Click to expand...
There is no force, for the millionth time nobody is forcing anything on you.
 
clax1911 said:
everybody pays taxes no matter what. If you don't want to this isn't the nation for you.
They aren't.teaching ideas. Why would you put your kids in a public school if you don't approve.

You are right, the people have spoken, you lost. Home school your kids, you still pay taxes everybody does you aren't special because you don't want you kids to learn that it's okay to be gay.

You can't have cake and eat it too. You clearly support public schools by having your kids attend.

That isn't what's occurring. Nobody is telling your kids to be gay or to accept gay people.
That isn't what is happening, the government, meaning the people have spoken, you are over ruled. That is why there are alternatives.

There is no force, for the millionth time nobody is forcing anything on you.
Click to expand...

yes, it is!

http://www.massnews.com/2004_editions/09_sept/091504_debate_with_cameker.htm

http://www.christianexaminer.com/Articles/Articles May06/Art_May06_05.html

http://www.wnd.com/2000/12/7653/
 
Last edited:
CLAX1911 said:
No it isn't, home school. Before you get on it, I think I deserve my taxes back first.
Click to expand...

no i want my school taxes, and you can pay them if you wish to send your child to public school.

vouchers for those who wish to send their children to a school of there choice.
 
ernst barkmann said:
no i want my school taxes, and you can pay them if you wish to send your child to public school.

vouchers for those who wish to send their children to a school of there choice.
Click to expand...

No way screw that, vouchers for people not having kids first. they shouldn't pay a dime.
 
CLAX1911 said:
No way screw that, vouchers for people not having kids first. they shouldn't pay a dime.
Click to expand...


vouchers ?......oh why are you against them....becuase you know if people have their choice they will leave the public system with its corruption, and brain washing the young.
 
ernst barkmann said:
no i want my school taxes, and you can pay them if you wish to send your child to public school.

vouchers for those who wish to send their children to a school of there choice.
Click to expand...

I want all my money back fur the time I didn't have a kid in school, technically I still don't. I should get a voucher first. You could have not had kids but you did now I pay for them and you get tax breaks.

Hell no.
 
ernst barkmann said:
vouchers ?......oh why are you against them....becuase you know if people have their choice they will leave the public system with its corruption, and brain washing the young.
Click to expand...

I am not against anything, but if vouchers are being passed out because the parents aren't putting kids in school, I think I should get mine first serum as I don't technically have a kid.
 
ernst barkmann said:
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.
Click to expand...
And one of those powers is spending money for the general welfare. You are misinterpreting again.
 
ernst barkmann said:
excuse me....i said no one has written more of the constitution than Madison, laid its framework, months before the convention, when it came to constitution, no one has written more on it over 45 year after it ratification.

tell me, who have provide more information than Madison on the constitution...no one.
Click to expand...
Quit lying. Not everyone agreed with Madison's interpretation, making a lot of his stuff null and void.

One signatory can't decide what is meant in a contract after-the-fact, the law doesn't work that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom