~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, David Sternlight wrote:
I've been around for so long that I knew when I typed the above someone would try to take my words literally in order to avoid my point and pick the above nit.
I don't think the 9th and 10th Amendments are nits.
If they disagree with what Congress and the administration have done, there are well-established ways to petition Congress to change it.
Read the 9th, David. Our rights exist whether or not the current regime recognizes them. The reason Congress gets away with so many violation is in part due to the current population being willing to exchange a false sense of security for out and out violations of the clear words of the Bill of Rights. That may be democracy, but at the expense of Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. Read the 9th and 10th, David.
If they fail, t.s.--that's the way our system works.
Or doesn't work.
YOU don't get to force your will on the wider population,
No, you merely get to stop others from forcing their will on you.
nor do YOU get to tell them that they are poor benighted fools who should agree with YOUR views on civil liberties. To assert otherwise is fascism, authoritarianism, dictatorship, pick one.
No, David, it's free speech. Read the 1st Amendmend, David. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~