• 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!

Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

ernst barkmann said:
i explained the difference between the ....two.

our declaration of independence states "unalienable"
Click to expand...

then you should read this

Unalienable / Inalienable

Unalienable / Inalienable


Dunlap Broadside


Jefferson's handwriting


Parchment copy
The question is often asked, "Is the word in the Declaration of Independence unalienable or is it inalienable?"

The final version of the Declaration uses the word "unalienable." Some earlier drafts used the word "inalienable," which is the term our modern dictionaries prefer. The two words mean precisely the same thing.

According to The American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style from Houghton Mifflin Company:

The unalienable rights that are mentioned in the Declaration of Independence could just as well have been inalienable, which means the same thing. Inalienable or unalienable refers to that which cannot be given away or taken away.
Click to expand...

There is no difference.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

ernst barkmann said:
i am well aware of this site you posted..........try mine


Unalienable Rights Defined
Click to expand...

Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably and they clearly met the same thing as the evidice I provided clearly states. At that time in history, they were simply different forms of the same meaning.

Your site says this right at the start

2. Things which are not in commerce, as public roads, are in their nature unalienable. Some things are unalienable, in consequence of particular provisions in the law forbidding their sale or transfer, as pensions granted by the government. The natural rights of life and liberty are UNALIENABLE. Bouviers Law Dictionary 1856 Edition

"Unalienable: incapable of being alienated, that is, sold and transferred." Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523:

You can not surrender, sell or transfer unalienable rights, they are a gift from the creator to the individual and can not under any circumstances be surrendered or taken. All individual's have unalienable rights.
Click to expand...

With the mention that they come from the creator - we again wander into the realm of religious belief with supernatural spirits dispensing rights from high above like so much Halloween candy given to toddlers in colorful costumes every October 31.

In the real world we live in, rights can indeed be taken away and have been done so throughout history.

Statements of religious belief are no good when reality contradicts them.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

State Constitutions use the terms, indefeasible or inalienable; and could be considered interchangeable; unless we need to quibble.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

haymarket said:
Jefferson used the two terms interchangeably and they clearly met the same thing as the evidice I provided clearly states. At that time in history, they were simply different forms of the same meaning.

Your site says this right at the start



With the mention that they come from the creator - we again wander into the realm of religious belief with supernatural spirits dispensing rights from high above like so much Halloween candy given to toddlers in colorful costumes every October 31.

In the real world we live in, rights can indeed be taken away and have been done so throughout history.

Statements of religious belief are no good when reality contradicts them.
Click to expand...

i don't know why this discussion is really transpiring.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

ernst barkmann said:
i don't know why this discussion is really transpiring.
Click to expand...

Because you saw fit to attempt to correct me in your 468 and pretend that was some difference in the distinction when there is not.

I also strongly suspect - based on exchanges with you in the past - that you hinge some important point in your mind on that one particular meaning of the word you prefer - and it is a house of cards upon which your further claims and allegations will be based upon.

How about that? Any truth to that? Why is it important for you to claim that rights cannot be taken away when history shows just the opposite?

For example - is the right to keep and bear arms one of these unalienable rights that cannot be taken away because God or the creator or some force of nature bestowed to man?
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

ernst barkmann said:
i don't know why this discussion is really transpiring.
Click to expand...

might look to yourself and your posts to see why this discussion has gotten so off-track and into such mind-numbing writing.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

haymarket said:
Because you saw fit to attempt to correct me in your 468 and pretend that was some difference in the distinction when there is not.

I also strongly suspect - based on exchanges with you in the past - that you hinge some important point in your mind on that one particular meaning of the word you prefer - and it is a house of cards upon which your further claims and allegations will be based upon.

How about that? Any truth to that? Why is it important for you to claim that rights cannot be taken away when history shows just the opposite?

For example - is the right to keep and bear arms one of these unalienable rights that cannot be taken away because God or the creator or some force of nature bestowed to man?
Click to expand...

we only need to distinguish if we need to quibble.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

paddymcdougall said:
might look to yourself and your posts to see why this discussion has gotten so off-track and into such mind-numbing writing.
Click to expand...


which is why i dint want to take on another subject.........as to the personal remark.......

you cannot deal with things being said, so you go only into the direction you can [ mind-numbing writing] .......which is why your arguments were weak.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

haymarket said:
Because you saw fit to attempt to correct me in your 468 and pretend that was some difference in the distinction when there is not.

I also strongly suspect - based on exchanges with you in the past - that you hinge some important point in your mind on that one particular meaning of the word you prefer - and it is a house of cards upon which your further claims and allegations will be based upon.

How about that? Any truth to that? Why is it important for you to claim that rights cannot be taken away when history shows just the opposite?

For example - is the right to keep and bear arms one of these unalienable rights that cannot be taken away because God or the creator or some force of nature bestowed to man?
Click to expand...



i am not going far with this.

WRONG!......you sought to correct me....in post 442 which comes before 468

you ..you first stated to me......."what do you mean inalienable?

i stated unalienable because that is what the document [ IN WASHINGTON D.C. ]states.....it does not say inalienable.

if you take the time to read you will see the founders, in discussing our constitution and its ratification THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE, they use the word..... unalienable


sought, seek•ing. v.t.
1. to go in search or quest of.
2. to try to discover, as by studying.
3. to try to obtain: to seek fame.

.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

ernst barkmann said:
i am not going far with this.

WRONG!......you sought to correct me....in post 442 which comes before 468

you ..you first stated to me......."what do you mean inalienable?

i stated unalienable because that is what the document [ IN WASHINGTON D.C. ]states.....it does not say inalienable.

if you take the time to read you will see the founders, in discussing our constitution and its ratification THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE, they use the word..... unalienable


sought, seek•ing. v.t.
1. to go in search or quest of.
2. to try to discover, as by studying.
3. to try to obtain: to seek fame.

.
Click to expand...

I did not correct you in 442. I merely used a variation of the same word with the same meaning. It was you who then attempted to make an issue of it. But at least we found out there is no difference and the terms can be used interchangeably just like Jefferson himself did meaning the same thing.

So now we can move on.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

haymarket said:
i did not correct you in 442. I merely used a variation of the same word with the same meaning. It was you who then attempted to make an issue of it. But at least we found out there is no difference and the terms can be used interchangeably just like jefferson himself did meaning the same thing.

So now we can move on.
Click to expand...

you sought to find..you were looking to engage me.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

ernst barkmann said:
you sought to find..you were looking to engage me.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you mean. Again, do you contend that there is something special in your use of the word unalienable that distinguishes it from the same meaning of the word inalienable?

Does your argument hinge on that just the same you argued in two different threads for a month all about mixed government when you finally conceded there was nothing to argue about since the constitutional mandate of a republican form of government is what the USA has?
 
Jesus tap-dancing Christ, move on already.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

haymarket said:
I have no idea what you mean. Again, do you contend that there is something special in your use of the word unalienable that distinguishes it from the same meaning of the word inalienable?

Does your argument hinge on that just the same you argued in two different threads for a month all about mixed government when you finally conceded there was nothing to argue about since the constitutional mandate of a republican form of government is what the USA has?
Click to expand...

haymarket , follow Kobie's advise
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

APACHERAT said:
That's an errorless observation. It's not everyday that a liberal pulls their head out of the sand to makes an observation of the consequences of radical leftist policies. One of the main objectives of the progressive movement was to preserve America and prevent it from becoming a third world carnival. I think the progressive movement was hijacked by radicals.
Click to expand...

Nawww the Progressive movement has simply refined the firing data. Born in an age of colonialism, intense nationalism, with a heaping helping of institutional racism, while our nation was rising to World Power status, the world bled through two huge wars. The Progressive movement has changed as conditions changed. That some see 'radicals' in the bushes might be more due to a severe Observer-target angle than anything else.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

ernst barkmann said:
haymarket , follow Kobie's advise
Click to expand...

I am attempting to do just that. Lets discuss the issue. Does your argument hinge the word UNALIENABLE as opposed to the word INALIENABLE and do you ascribe a different meaning to one over the other? Or do you accept the undeniable historical evidence from Jefferson himself that the two terms can be used interchangeably without changing the meaning?

And so I understand this idea you have put forth that rights cannot be taken away - is it your contention that the right to keep and bear arms is one of those inalienable rights that cannot be taken away.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

fmw said:
Oxymoron.
Click to expand...

How is it an oxymoron?
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

Henrin said:
Can you prove the existence of this social contract? Unlike natural rights that can easily be support by reason, there is no such thing possible with the idea of a social contract.
Click to expand...
Of course there is. Absence of that social contract there are no rights. Why didn't people have rights always? It took the social contract to make it so.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

Henrin said:
If this social contract existed than evidence of this contract would need to be presented to a court of law in order for them to enforce it legally.
Click to expand...
It exists, it is the Constitution and the rest of our laws.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

prometeus said:
It exists, it is the Constitution and the rest of our laws.
Click to expand...

The constitution is a treaty, not a contract.
 
Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

prometeus said:
Of course there is. Absence of that social contract there are no rights. Why didn't people have rights always? It took the social contract to make it so.
Click to expand...

They always had rights. You are confusing protection of rights with the existence of rights.
 
MildSteel said:
A new Pew Research survey seems to indicate that millenials, the age group from 18 to 33, tend to favor gay rights and marijuana legalization. and tend to vote for Democrats. I think it is highly likely that Democrats have embraced these two issues to drive a stake in the heart of the Republican party. Recall recently how Obama spoke in favor of marijuana legalization and came out in favor of gay rights.

Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out? - The Week
Click to expand...

The GOP is nothing more than a tool used by oil/mining cos., the offense industry, and Wallstreet to advance its interests in Congress, by getting pols elected who can tell stupid people (i. e. red-state konservatives) that the "liberals" are going to take their guns and Bibles away, let Muslims "win", and make America non-White.

That's it.

Hence, the GOP's survival ultimately depends on a continual supply of stupid voters who fall for that crap. So as that supply diminishes, the power of the GOP diminishes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom