Also, the Constitution was designed to force the federal government to treat everyone as an individual and an individual only regardless of the skin color, orientation, etc. But it was never really taken seriously by the people until the civil war.
That's pretty damn naive of you Daaman. Of course they denied liberty to certain social classes and genders. And this is also somewhat confusing. I mean, so they were talking about the generalities of Liberty is a general way as an idea and concept, but they were micromanagingly specific about who gets it? They were either a bunch of lofty intellectuals speaking of self-evident truths and perfect unions or they were a bunch of realistic realists who decided that separation from England was the best course of action to continue their profits, mainly due to laws imposed on them by the country they thought they were still citizens of.
Now of course, this is a false dichotomy. It is equally possible that they were both, and only started studying liberty concepts when England's laws got a bit too hard on them. and Ideas of Welfare in the Constitution are, say, open to interpretation. And that's exactly what the courts are for and the power given to them by the Constitution. To interpret it. To abide by it Exactly, to the letter, is to say BlacknMild2k1 on our forums is worth 3/5 of a citizen. The reason we are open to interpret the Constitution is because... well... I'll let Jefferson speak for me: "Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment... laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind... as that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, institutions must advance also, to keep pace with the times.... We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain forever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." Makes you wonder about certain bills in said bill of rights, huh?
And as for UncleBob, I am coming over to your house and taking my property. You may say its yours, but I say it's mine. What are you gonna do about it? Take me before court? And what, ask a judge, a representative of government, to take my property, BY FORCE, and give it to you, when you have no legal claim to my property other than your word that it is yours?
Besides the actual amount of tax money that goes to welfare (by which I assume you mean programs like TANF and Food Stamps) is dwarfed in comparison to Defense. Stop listening to reports about Welfare Queens and debtbeats as examples of government "redistribution." You know what happens to that money... usually? They buy either food and goods which support business, or they buy fawties, which also supports business. Or they buy drugs, and the dealers then buy rims and dubs, which also supports business. Or they pay bills, which bolster energy companies. It;s the only time I'm happy there's a middleman, and why it's actually good to give out money to poor people. Because they'll buy stuff with it. CAPITALISM!
Topic: What I said to Hillary (pertinent to videogames) (Read 36228 times)
