Liberal Forum

jack » 21 Feb 2023, 12:43 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 12:43 pm

So many erudite, well crafted observations from our Right wingers. "...suck a dick you loser" is almost Harvard/Yale material.

Just a note. The second amendment was ratified in 1791. Before 2008 the amendment had never codified an individual right to bear arms. Then a
conservative Supreme Court suddenly said it had discovered it did. Maybe those "authors of the Constitution" would have been surprised it took so long. More likely they would have been surprised that a politically driven court had the gall to twist their single sentence Amendment into the reverse of what it said.

You really think you jackasses deserve anything better than ridicule?
 

RebelGator » 21 Feb 2023, 4:28 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 4:28 pm

Was he resurrected,  since he died before the Hogg was born.....or did he tell you in a dream, Wilford?

his words speak for themselves.  I take it there were too many of them, and they were probably all too big for you to actually read, eh?

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 2:24 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 2:24 pm

Just wondering...
Do you have a gun in your house?

And would you give it to Beto O'Rourke if he pulled in your driveway?

Just a quick question....

Why should I answer one of your disingenuous questions when you refuse to answer any of mine?

MM is anti constitution

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 4:45 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 4:45 pm

Do you have a gun ?
You already said you do...

Why don't you forfeit it then?

Why should I answer one of your disingenuous questions when you refuse to answer any of mine which are anything BUT disingenuous?
 

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 4:45 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 4:45 pm

Do you have a gun ?
You already said you do...

Why don't you forfeit it then?

Let me ask you another serious question:

Do you think that Warren Burger advocated that gun owners forfeit their legally owned firearms?

Y/N?

maineman » 21 Feb 2023, 1:51 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 1:51 pm

Read what Former chief justice Burger wrote and then, try to discuss his comments with a modicum of intelligence.

I dare you.

I assume you are referring to these words;

“The very language of the Second Amendment,” wrote Burger, “refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires. … The Framers clearly intended to secure the right to bear arms essentially for military purposes.”

Since his words weren't part of a SCOTUS ruling, they are nothing more than Op-Ed.
 

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 4:50 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 4:50 pm

Beto O'Rourke said he's coming for your guns...
door to door...

Hope he pulls into your driveway first...

you really can't do it, can you?

You can't even pretend to have a serious discussion about ANYTHING.


 

ConsRule » 21 Feb 2023, 4:53 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 4:53 pm

I assume you are referring to these words;

“The very language of the Second Amendment,” wrote Burger, “refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires. … The Framers clearly intended to secure the right to bear arms essentially for military purposes.”

Since his words weren't part of a SCOTUS ruling, they are nothing more than Op-Ed.

indeed.  The former Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court - a judge first nominated by Ike in 1956, who served on the Appeals Court for 13 years before being nominated by Nixon to replace Earl Warren as Chief Justice of SCOTUS in 1969 had an opinion.  And he eloquently expressed it.  And I am referring to the entire body of writing that Burger put out on what he viewed as a misreading of the purpose and intent of the Second Amendment.  I won't reduce it down to a two sentence sound bit even though you would like to.

maineman » 21 Feb 2023, 5:01 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 5:01 pm

indeed.  The former Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court - a judge first nominated by Ike in 1956, who served on the Appeals Court for 13 years before being nominated by Nixon to replace Earl Warren as Chief Justice of SCOTUS in 1969 had an opinion.  And he eloquently expressed it.  And I am referring to the entire body of writing that Burger put out on what he viewed as a misreading of the purpose and intent of the Second Amendment.  I won't reduce it down to a two sentence sound bit even though you would like to.

But the Berger Court never ruled on a 2nd Amendment case, therefore his words are either Op-Ed or irrelevant due to SCOTUS rulings.  For that matter, if they HAD ruled on a 2nd Amendment case, subsequent SCOTUS rulings would make it irrelevant.


 

ConsRule » 21 Feb 2023, 5:05 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 5:05 pm

But the Berger Court never ruled on a 2nd Amendment case, therefore his words are either Op-Ed or irrelevant due to SCOTUS rulings.  For that matter, if they HAD ruled on a 2nd Amendment case, subsequent SCOTUS rulings would make it irrelevant.

In the public square, where ideas are freely exchanged, and should continue to be so, the opinion of a learned jurist on a constitutional issue is never "irrelevant".
 

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 4:55 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 4:55 pm

Since you agree with Burger what about his views on gays and women on the Supreme Court?

I can almost assure you, mainemonkey only points to Burger's words when he agrees with them.
 

maineman » 21 Feb 2023, 5:07 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 5:07 pm

In the public square, where ideas are freely exchanged, and should continue to be so, the opinion of a learned jurist on a constitutional issue is never "irrelevant".

When it comes to existing law, they are. And they matter no more than the opinion of Gonzo **** from Kaktovik, AK.

 
 

maineman » 21 Feb 2023, 4:37 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 4:37 pm

Why should I answer one of your disingenuous questions when you refuse to answer any of mine?

You establish and maintain reasonable doubt as all the truth anyone needs to know to serve their separate reality making huumanities happen all the time in place of everyone understanding the common denominator of life.

You numerate possibilities to the end of time as your ideology professes how evolving should happen with intellectual design to outcomes ariving forward from here.

You insist nobody can know every reality but you never discuss the actual evolving aspect to living one at a time now. Your mind won't accept what your brain was conceoved to navigate living as one of a kind, one at atime now here and nowhere else universally possible.

Me vs we and you speak for the species itself. Or maybe your people that contribute to your individual DNA by previous generations of contracting numbers adding more generation gaps here.

ConsRule » 21 Feb 2023, 5:11 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 5:11 pm

When it comes to existing law, they are. And they matter no more than the opinion of Gonzo **** from Kaktovik, AK.

I bet you would have said that about Plessy back in the day.

ConsRule » 21 Feb 2023, 5:07 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 5:07 pm

I can almost assure you, mainemonkey only points to Burger's words when he agrees with them.

Unlike you, who, when he finds one idea from any one thinker, feels strangely compelled to agree with each and every other idea that person has ever had or will have?

Yeah... we're definitely different in that regard.
 

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 6:01 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 6:01 pm

You're a liberal moron...

I am far from a moron... and you're an unimaginative sheeple who has never had an original thought in your entire pathetic worthless existence.

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 5:43 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 5:43 pm

Last week you said he thinks no cash bail is a great idea

I don't think I said that.  If you can produce my quote, I'll gladly admit to being wrong.
 

Z09 » 20 Feb 2023, 8:11 pm » wrote: ↑

20 Feb 2023, 8:11 pm

Looks like a Nazi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TAzE_WZgEw

Z09 » 21 Feb 2023, 7:07 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Feb 2023, 7:07 pm

Not you..

Maineman said it

Liar.