And what exactly does "promoting civil [sic] responsibility" mean? Ditto "abiding by the Constitution"? There seems to be considerable disagreement over these nowadays, particularly with regard to the Constitution.
Life Under the Tea Party
- Thread starter dbphoenix
- Start date
And what exactly does "promoting civil [sic] responsibility" mean? Ditto "abiding by the Constitution"? There seems to be considerable disagreement over these nowadays, particularly with regard to the Constitution.
Yup..
This is good to know, Spike. Please consider them when you next support something that blatantly goes against any of them.
Abiding by the Constitution, to me, means following it. Stop the discussion on going after freedom of expression. Stop the discussion going after the second amendment, for example. If you want another amendment or want to change the document in some regard, then go through the process of amending it.
Respect the powers of each of the branches. Follow the guide of legislation, etc. If the Federal Government is involved in something outside of what the Constitution says it should be, then change the Constitution to amend the Federal Government's responsibility. Don't just add and make it bigger because a particular party wants a new department (education, energy, homeland security, etc).
Civic duty is about politicians doing what their constituents voted them in to do, and continuing to do what their constituents want - not what the politician (or lobbyist) wants.
I think, if you want to play dumb, you can say things like "what does that even mean?" While I will certainly admit some clarity should be made to generic proposals, saying people would have to be "brain dead" to support most of the principles is just a bit ridiculous.
That's just a tautology. If those who urge "abiding" by it or "following" it can't agree on what it says, how is one to abide by it?
That's why we have Constitutional Lawyers - and a Supreme Court. Together, they are supposed to tell us what the Constitution finds legal and what it does not.
You still haven't explained why you consider this to be something you would have to be partially brain dead to support.
Because it has yet to be defined. Anyone of intelligence will not support what has not been defined.
Just because you don't like or accept the definition does not mean it has yet to be defined.
If you believe that abiding by the Constitution means to follow it and that's all there is to it, then good luck to you.
It's worked for this country for quite a long time now. Only in the last 30 or so years has this become discussion - particularly in the last 15 or so - largely attributed to the rise of progressives like yourself that consider a document hundreds of years old is suddenly "open to interpretation".
He's been too consistent in his anti-America actions and policies to simply be stupid.
If you can recall... on his decisions, nearly all of them.... he's ALWAYS made the choice which disfavored America and/or favored Muslims. His Freudian slips have revealed he's actually a Muslim.... and as such HATES AMERICA!
:>(