our rights in the usa

from JoeUser Forums
people like bush are willing to take away some rights to protect us. This is bad, very bad, very very bad.


people like dictator gene are willing to take away all of our rights so we don't upset anyone and no one gets killed. I don't have the words to tell how bad this is.


i do know that dictator gene and most of the demos in congress are opposed to having an army. so am i but i also know that right now it is a neccassary evil.


if i had my way all wars would be fought on computers. that way no one would have to die in a war.

5,194 views 15 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
but then i am an idiot as gid, Sean, and dictator gene keep saying. because i don't spell very well and i don't write very well. but my excuse is i have been hiding under a barrel for over 20 years.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
But you're dead wrong about Gid.


what i thought gid has come down on me several times becouse of my spelling, and writing skills
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
what i thought gid has come down on me several times becouse of my spelling, and writing skills


Danielost,

Actually, my biggest issue is neither of those. You know what the biggest issue is, I don't need to repeat it.

But let's talk about the spelling and the writing for a moment. You can have the best ideas in the world, but if you can't present them properly, you are not going to get your point across.

This is your blog and you can do what you want with it, of course, but if you'd rather be read and taken seriously, there are some things you can do to improve that. It's all up to you.

Take this article, for instance. These are some good talking points. Expand on them. Elaborate. I think you'll find more people reading your work.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
but then i am an idiot as gid, Sean, and dictator gene keep saying. because i don't spell very well and i don't write very well. but my excuse is i have been hiding under a barrel for over 20 years.


i was just using this as a bump
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Take this article, for instance. These are some good talking points. Expand on them. Elaborate. I think you'll find more people reading your work.


i want others to express their ideas if i tell them what to think then how is that any better the gene or sean
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
i want others to express their ideas if i tell them what to think then how is that any better the gene or sean


You're not telling people how to think, danie, we're doing that on our own. You're giving us a little bit of who you are so that we can make an informed decision.

Yes, if you have strong opinions, you'll get strong debate. But that's a good thing, actually.

Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Um...what about the left squashing free speech all over the place.

They are trying to legislate "hurtful words"?   

Trying to ban certain speech? Ban certain words? How can ANYONE spin this positively?

Offensive distasteful speech MUST be protected.

If all speech was acceptable to all poeople why would we even need the second ammendment?

Again, offensive, distastful speech MUST be protected or all is lost in this country.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Frankly, I don't think the left is any worse or better than the right. Each POV uses hyperbole, each smears, each attempts to dismiss the other. For what? I dunno. Sometimes it just seems like mental masturbation on the one hand or pissing contests on the other.

I do think it is our best interest however to monitor the party in power and check their abuses. Both sides do it. While I am no fan of the right and certainly not of President Bush, I do not think he means to harm the United states any more than Col. Gene does.

Distasteful speech must be protected, Skyjack, I agree with you. Yet, I also am aware that speech can, in fact, be both hurtful and incendiary. I am not sure such speech should be protected. I do think we need to explore this issue and not fall into the pitfalls of black and white legalism.

Be well.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Frankly, I don't think the left is any worse or better than the right. Each POV uses hyperbole, each smears, each attempts to dismiss the other. For what? I dunno. Sometimes it just seems like mental masturbation on the one hand or pissing contests on the other.

I do think it is our best interest however to monitor the party in power and check their abuses. Both sides do it. While I am no fan of the right and certainly not of President Bush, I do not think he means to harm the United states any more than Col. Gene does.

Distasteful speech must be protected, Skyjack, I agree with you. Yet, I also am aware that speech can, in fact, be both hurtful and incendiary. I am not sure such speech should be protected. I do think we need to explore this issue and not fall into the pitfalls of black and white legalism.

Be well.


Wrong. The second amendment was created to protect UNPOPULAR speech.

People getting their little feelings hurt cannot be a consideration.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
The second amendment was


first.


Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
you can say anything you want as long as your not trying to enrage people. at least not without a permit.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top


Wrong. The FIRST amendment was created to protect UNPOPULAR speech.

People getting their little feelings hurt cannot be a consideration.



Fixed.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
you can say anything you want as long as your not trying to enrage people. at least not without a permit.


So then, what's with the lefties trying to ban speech?
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
So then, what's with the lefties trying to ban speech?


they want to control everything.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Wrong. The second amendment was created to protect UNPOPULAR speech."

This was so hilarious.

All I could think was, "With a gun like that, no-one's listening anyway!"