suckage: John McCain

[sbp]

McCain your cranky ass lost in the primary so stop trying to push your agenda over Bushs agenda.

[pennypinch]

At least he's read the constitution...

Repeat after me, monkey-boy: "Division of church and state...division of church and state..."

[Jenny]

democrats, repeat after me: "Right to bear arms. Right to bear arms."

;)

[pennypinch]

Originally posted by Jenny
democrats, repeat after me: "Right to bear arms. Right to bear arms."

;)
I don't see anywhere in the 2nd amendment that says "the right to bear arms without child safety locks" or "right to bear arms without a license"...

or did I overlook that part?

[Jenny]

It's not that I necessarily disagree with those 2 requirements. I just disagree with totally taking away the right to own a gun, which a lot of people apparently agree with. :)

[Apex]

LOL, you forgot the <sarcasm></sarcasm> tags on your post pennypinch. As you, and probably everyone who has actually read the constitution knows, there is no mention of "division of church and state" in there at all. :)

For those of you who haven't yet, the often misquoted "separation of church and state" was found here:

Thomas Jefferson's famous "wall of separation" between church and state comment was made in a letter to a group of Baptist clergymen January 1, 1802 in Danbury, Connecticut, who feared the Congregationalists Church would become the state-sponsored religion. Jefferson assured the Danbury Baptist Association that the First Amendment guaranteed that there would be no establishment of any one denomination over another. It was never intended for our governing bodies to be "separated" from Christianity and its principles. The "wall" was understood as one directional; its purpose was to protect the church from the state.

Last I heard, thanks to the many who have worked to pull these few words wildly out of context, over 2/3 of Americans actually believe these words to be in our Constitution.

[sbp]

Pennypinch is mad because his boy McCain went down in the primaries. Are you Republican Pp? Do you live in an open primary state? If not you had no business rambling about how you would have voted for McCain. The anti-Christian bigotry chump lost in the primary deal with that. Its surprising that you, as an Asian you would for a guy who goes around and calls Asians disparaging names (see cranky ass McCains last trip to Vietnam}. Unless that is alright with you. http://www.gotapex.com/forums/images/icons/icon13.gif

I didn't see anywhere in the Constitution that said making it as difficult on citizens as possible to own firearms and that the government should be hostile to religion. Apex is correct about the often misquoted "separation of church and state". Religion and government are already working together. Churchs help resettle refugees's in the US and the government will reimburse some of the cost of doing so. "Its bad for churches to do help refugee's only government should that," said the scrawny punypinch. "Government should do everything including wiping my runny nose!" punypinch dripped out. Don't allow your misguided hatred for religion to blind you to all the good religion does (another example El Salvador mudslides).

[Edited by sbp on 02-02-2001 at 03:59 AM]

[jase71]

Separation of Church and State isn't the only common misquote of the Constitution, though.

A lot of Americans mistakenly believe that the US is a "Christian" country, or should be.

In not one place in the Constitution does it mention God.

There's the Bill of Rights with Freedom of Religion, and the Pledge, with "one nation under God"... but not in the Constitution.

[pennypinch]

Originally posted by sbp
Pennypinch is mad because his boy McCain went down in the primaries. Are you Republican Pp? Do you live in an open primary state? If not you had no business rambling about how you would have voted for McCain. The anti-Christian bigotry chump lost in the primary deal with that. Its surprising that you, as an Asian you would for a guy who goes around and calls Asians disparaging names (see cranky ass McCains last trip to Vietnam}. Unless that is alright with you. http://www.gotapex.com/forums/images/icons/icon13.gif

I didn't see anywhere in the Constitution that said making it as difficult on citizens as possible to own firearms and that the government should be hostile to religion. Apex is correct about the often misquoted "separation of church and state". Religion and government are already working together. Churchs help resettle refugees's in the US and the government will reimburse some of the cost of doing so. "Its bad for churches to do help refugee's only government should that," said the scrawny punypinch. "Government should do everything including wiping my runny nose!" punypinch dripped out. Don't allow your misguided hatred for religion to blind you to all the good religion does (another example El Salvador mudslides).


Oh, that's spectacular, resort to name calling. :rolleyes:

And yes, I am registered in Washington. That's what you'd call an open primary state, right? :rolleyes: So frankly, I'll bitch and moan that I would have voted for McCain any goddamn time of the day I feel like it.

If I really have to explain the point of the division of church and state to you (which Apex correctly points out is not in the constitution), then I've certainly vastly overestimated your intelligence. It has nothing to do with hatred of religion, it has to do with equality.

[Grimm]

[/B][/QUOTE]
I don't see anywhere in the 2nd amendment that says "the right to bear arms without child safety locks" or "right to bear arms without a license"...

or did I overlook that part? [/B][/QUOTE]

Actualy if you bother to read the Constitution, it states that the government may not "infringe" upon the right to keep and bear arms. Infringe means to interfere with in ANY way.
Anything that interferes with someone posing a gun is a violation of the Constitution. With the exception of being convicted of a felony (which is provided for under the Constitution) there is no legal way for the federal government to interfere with you keeping arms. If the second amendment was interpreted as strictly as the first, requireing gun manufactures to serialize the would be considered illegal. Why? The cost of numbering the gun is passed on to the consumer, interfering with his purchase of the gun by making the cost higher. That is of course an extreme example. No reasonable person would complain about the cost of the gun being a few cents higher because of the serial number.
Any person who believes that the first amendment alone will keep this county free is a fool. History shows us that two things are required to keep a people free. Free speach and the means to force it to be allowed. So long as the means are there it should never be needed. Any person who tells you that you do not need firearms is either a fool themselves, or wants to enslave you.

[helius]

Right to bear arms?!? Feh!

I want the right to arm bears! :smash: