Another observation about our 'implimentation' of the Constitution... Since we live in a democracy based on 'consent' (1st 2 para's DoI) and the concept of 'life, liberty, pursuit of happiness' coupled with 'shall not interfere with others expression' as axiomatic concepts of American democracy it isn't too hard to understand that we don't live there. What we have is a system that is focused on ways around the Constitution based on 'good of society' concepts. The base problem with them is the a priori assumption that the Constitution doesn't work and needs to be worked around in the first place. People don't believe that a 'free market' social system like American Democracy doesn't work. This is not a new character however, as Jefferson said; I am not one of those who fear the people. Anyone who talks of 'idiots', 'sheep', 'naive', 'just don't understand', 'minimal economic impact', etc. are typical examples of those who fundamentaly don't believe in a 'free market' concept (and not paradoxically who'll sell your rights for profit - to reword Jefferson a tad). American democracy predicates axiomatically that, yes there are some really stupid people out there but whatever their performance level it's going to be better than you making decisions for them. What we have today is a rampant rush to 'security' not through free market social mechanisms but through a 'control economy' sort of society. You'd have thought all these (supposedly) bright people could look at the CCCP, China, Cuba, etc. examples and put 2 and 2 together. Alas, Jefferson was right, there are no angels...just a bunch of predatory assholes. (and people wonder why othe people who feel abused riot in the streets, I wonder how their attitude would change when the mop handle was up their butthole?) ....'the people' doesn't apply to the 'individual' indeed. What does that second para of the DoI say about a citizens duty? And on the topic of 'limiting felons rights', where in the Constitution does it give the federal government any regulatory action over rights? It gives them a bunch of jobs and directs them to comply with the laws and treaties made UNDER the Constitution (which has this nifty 9'th Amendment). Where in the Constitution is the word 'felon' (or a synonym thereof) even used? (if you can't find it, find the 10'th and ponder that baby for a moment) On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, A. Melon wrote:

Those 3 things you mentioned violate the First on at least two counts, free speech and press, and also the "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" part --- the obscenity and kid porn stuff is pure Judeo-Christian bigotry. Whose to say other religions wouldn't teach the opposite? Like the worship of Ishtar (Easter) for instance, whose scriptures have Her saying "My father taught me the kissing of the phallus". Or read "Coming of Age in Somoa" by Margret Mead.

George@Orwellian.Org wrote:

Jimminy Critic wrote: # # Where is that boundary condition in the amendment? Saying "felons # may not own firearms" is certainly an infringment. Rights don't # come from the state after all (see 1st two para's of the DoI). # # Amendment II # # A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of # a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, # shall not be infringed.

Gee, how pure and simple.

What is your position on the First Amendment and:

o "obscenity"

o child pornography

o generated non-child child pornography

-- ____________________________________________________________________ Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night: God said, "Let Tesla be", and all was light. B.A. Behrend The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

On 12 Jul 2001, at 19:55, A. Melon wrote:

Those 3 things you mentioned violate the First on at least two counts, free speech and press, and also the "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" part --- the obscenity and kid porn stuff is pure Judeo-Christian bigotry.

Whose to say other religions wouldn't teach the opposite? Like

I don't think so. AFAIK the bible doesn't condemn pedophilia anywhere, and in any case basing laws on moral values that come from your religion is not at all the same as repecting the esatblishment of a religeon. the

worship of Ishtar (Easter) for instance, whose scriptures have Her saying "My father taught me the kissing of the phallus". Or read "Coming of Age in Somoa" by Margret Mead.

I don't know much about Ashtaroth, but but I do no that COAIS has been refuted as a total hoax. George