Go back
Naked pics of Trump Judge

Naked pics of Trump Judge

Debates

1 edit

@no1marauder said
Google "Natural Law"; I haven't the time or inclination to provide you with an education.
Sorrry, I was just trying to boil down your high-brow researched definitions, some of which go back to Medieval times, to something for 21sr centry people to learn and apply to our daily lives. Your lieutenant Kev is quoting Leviticus for god sakes, wants us to start sharing everything we own. And you yourself in past posts have alluded to our living under Marx philosophy, same thing.
I am not going to google natural law, as that is not part of my curriculum. I am curious, can you tell us why it is so important to you? Why do you think you need to espouse it? To what end?
This is a serious question. I wish you would answer it.

Herei is an article,can you tell me and our readers how you are tying all this crap into threads and into our daily lives. No one ever mentioned 'natural law' to any extent in my progessional days. What has your treatise got to do with anything? It is enough to try to drag this crowd into the Constitution. If you want to teach a class on this stuff, as is your usual penchant, the only way that you converse, maybe Russ would open a new Forum genre for you.

https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/the-natural-law-foundation-of-the-constitution


@averagejoe1 said
Sorrry, I was just trying to boil down your high-brow researched definitions, some of which go back to Medieval times, to something for 21sr centry people to learn and apply to our daily lives. Your lieutenant Kev is quoting Leviticus for god sakes, wants us to start sharing everything we own. And you yourself in past posts have alluded to our living under Marx philoso ...[text shortened]... nk you need to espouse it? To what end?
This is a serious question. I wish you would answer it.
It's the basis of the United States Constitution you pendejo


@athousandyoung said
It's the basis of the United States Constitution you pendejo
So? It is the basis, a given. Maybe you can tell us what Maruader is about, I thought we were just having nice discussions. Not go off into tangents. Maybe next it will be the mysterious mindset of Benjamin Frankliin. Jesus.
Again, what is Maruader's problem? Are Suzianne and Kev going to glomb onto Natural Law? Help me Rhonda.

1 edit

@athousandyoung said
It's the basis of the United States Constitution you pendejo
Well, you are a bufon! You asked for it. You are jester from here on. 🤡

1 edit

@averagejoe1 said
Sorrry, I was just trying to boil down your high-brow researched definitions, some of which go back to Medieval times, to something for 21sr centry people to learn and apply to our daily lives. Your lieutenant Kev is quoting Leviticus for god sakes, wants us to start sharing everything we own. And you yourself in past posts have alluded to our living under Marx philoso ...[text shortened]... for you.

https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/the-natural-law-foundation-of-the-constitution
"The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order, and about his business; they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not one another’s pleasure: and being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us, that may authorize us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another’s uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for our’s. Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another."

John Locke, Two Treatises of Civil Government, Part II, Chapter 2, Section 6

Of course, Western men in the 18th Century traced this law to our "sovereign master" i.e. God but really it is apparent in our nature (which does not require, though does not exclude the possibility of, a God).

This discussion is relevant to Wajoma's post I replied to; if it's over your head, so be it.

1 edit

@no1marauder said
"The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one ...[text shortened]... od).

This discussion is relevant to Wajoma's post I replied to; if it's over your head, so be it.
Oh,, it is over my head, all right. Starting on line 2, '.that being all equal and independent.....' Yeah, you could write tomes on that one, holy Jesus. If we discussed it (which I ain't THINKIN' about!) I wlould ask you about the oxymoron (?) where he says we can be equal and independent at the same time!!!!!!!
I have often laced my posts with 'Some people work harder than others'. So,........................Marauder..................................the workers and 'the others' can hardly be equal. So since equality is impossible, the sentence is dead before you even GET to the 'and independent' part. Help me Rhonda.


@averagejoe1 said
Oh,, it is over my head, all right. Starting on line 2, '.that being all equal and independent.....' Yeah, you could write tomes on that one, holy Jesus. If we discussed it (which I ain't THINKIN' about!) I wlould ask you about the oxymoron (?) where he says we can be equal and independent at the same time!!!!!!!
I have often laced my posts with 'Some people wo ...[text shortened]... mpossible, the sentence is dead before you even GET to the 'and independent' part. Help me Rhonda.
Ever heard of this one:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal"


@no1marauder said
Ever heard of this one:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal"
Again- can you apply that truism to any issues that are being discussed on the Forum at this time? Equal in what way would be a good start!😊


@averagejoe1 said
Again- can you apply that truism to any issues that are being discussed on the Forum at this time? Equal in what way would be a good start!😊
Equal in that they all have "unalienable rights".

Do you have any idea what they are?


Damn it, I was hoping the naked pics were of the Trump judge in Florida.

1 edit

@suzianne said
Equal in that they all have "unalienable rights".

Do you have any idea what they are?
I have read that preamble for sure, can you be the person to apply its intent, the interpretation thereof, to any issue at hand? I am being 'genuous' here....you will recall that a few months ago that one of our respected members interpreted the reference to 'welfare' as literally being the welfare program of the government. Let us do better than that.
You will also recall that Shav believes ,not actually relating to the constitution, that everyone (on earth?!) is entitled to free housing. Where would one even start in debating a comment like that? Maybe he is being 'disingenuous'.?


@vivify said
Damn it, I was hoping the naked pics were of the Trump judge in Florida.
We're lucky the title wasn't "Naked pics of Judge Trump".

AJ1 would've been all over that.

Puts a tingle right up his spine just thinking about it.

1 edit

@averagejoe1 said
I have read that preamble for sure, can you be the person to apply its intent, the interpretation thereof, to any issue at hand? I am being 'genuous' here....you will recall that a few months ago that one of our respected members interpreted the reference to 'welfare' as literally being the welfare program of the government. Let us do better than that.
You will als ...[text shortened]... . Where would one even start in debating a comment like that? Maybe he is being 'disingenuous'.?
So, your answer is "no", you have no idea what "unalienable rights" are?

Apparently, Trump's bought-and-paid-for Supreme Court thinks like you do.


@Suzianne
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

All of y'all debate the constitution with Sue. High level stuff


@averagejoe1 said
Every day except Sunday, when I am in church praying for atheists. Who else will pray for them, after all.
Next time you’re in Church ask the pastor what Leviticus is.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.