Jump to content
The fact that you do everything possible but answer my question establishes that you know the correct answer. The correct answer dismantles arguments supporting legalized theft. I offer you one more opportunity; Is it right to take from one person against their will and give these proceeds to another? Your answer, or lack of, demonstrates much about character and principle.
My question is not a matter of what is “legal”; it is a matter of what is moral. The fact that you are so evasive answers my question.
Once again you obfuscate. The Justices of the Supreme Court are employees of the federal government. They are appointed by politicians, and with few exceptions, they have proven to be political animals catering to their employer. Their employer hates the Constitution. The SCOTUS does not determine what is right or wrong. I ask you a third time: Is it right to take from one person against their will and give these proceeds to another? This does not require a long dissertation. The answer to my question is either yes or no. Which is it?
You obfuscate rather than answer my question. I will ask again: Is it right to take from one person against their will and give these proceeds to another?
In order to distill the discussion of the ACA, or collectivism in general, down to basics, I have a question: Is it right to take from one person against their will and give these proceeds to another?
“Obamacare” is a Progressive (Fascist) exercise of plenary government power fundamentally opposed to economic freedom, therefore individual freedom, the principles upon which the united States were founded. It is yet another "Progressive" assault on the Constitution and liberty. A strictly limited government has become unlimited. As government grows, freedom and opportunity die. The “Affordable” care act is not about providing better access to affordable health care, it is about controlling and further plundering the people.
The “Affordable” Care Act is not private. It is a soft form of fascism, a “partnership” between the State and the Medical-Industrial complex. The concept of bottom up governance taught in government schools is a myth, certainly at the national level. Large corporate and monied interests control, and are the government. This has been the case for many generations.
This is a bit off topic: I am no scientist, but isn’t it time to stop referring to hydrocarbons in earth as fossil fuels? The term fossil fuels implies a very limited supply.
A welfare state with open borders will destroy a nation.
This is not to suggest that DMB is meeting in a dark room with co-conspirators to overthrow what is left of the Constitution*. She is a captive of the system herself. Her entire life has been spent working for, or being part of, the state which lives off of the private sector. It is all she knows. When Rep. Bush votes for gun control laws she attacks a fundamental right and is a useful “tool” for her superiors which do have an agenda to dismantle the Constitution. These things happen through incrementalism, gradualism – Mao Tse Tung’s Boiling Frog analogy. Therefore, when a politician votes for gun control laws, even if done unwittingly with good intentions, they are attempting to overthrow the Constitution.
*Democrats did conspire to pass unconstitutional gun control legislation. The outcome of the Democrat vote was predetermined and no opposing views supporting the 2nd Amendment from Colorado sheriffs or residents were considered.
Last login: Wednesday, April 16, 2014
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.