is it a constitutional right for a group to actively shut down town hall discussion?

[londonfog]

lincoln freed the slaves as a political gain, he was a slave owner and against freeing them until he realised he would gain from it. fyi.

Lincoln was a resident of Illinois before being elected president. Illinois was a "free" state--not a slave state. Slave ownership was not legal in the state of Illinois. After becoming President, Lincoln lived in the District of Columbia where slavery was legal. However, he did own a slaves during his time in the White House..

PLease check your facts before you post...
I do understand that the freeing of slave was a political move, but hell whats not a political move in politics

 

[fdd2blk]

Apple pie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Cherry pie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Banana cream pie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Pie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Pie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Pie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Rob Roy]

...this post makes no sense.

The totality of our Rights are not defined by the constitution. They are part of
being human, they are inalienable or unalienable if you prefer the terms used by the framers. Our Rights DO NOT come from our servants. May I suggest that you do a bit of reading?

 

[PVS]

It makes perfect sense. You have Creator/God/Human Rights the constitution just outlines the rights you have from birth.

lol wut?





i prefer blueberry pie. the good shit, not that syrupy crap they serve at diners.

 

[PVS]

The totality of our Rights are not defined by the constitution. They are part of
being human, they are inalienable or unalienable if you prefer the terms used by the framers. Our Rights DO NOT come from our servants. May I suggest that you do a bit of reading?

ok, only the opening of the constitution is 'the bill of rights' which amazingly outlines our inaliable rights. you said:

We do not have constitutional rights.

...which makes no logical sense.

and i can read just fine. thanks for your concern though.

 

[Rob Roy]

ok, only the opening of the constitution is 'the bill of rights' which amazingly outlines our inaliable rights. you said:



...which makes no logical sense.

and i can read just fine. thanks for your concern though.

The bill of rights is a bit of a misnomer, practically speaking it is a bill of prohibitions upon the government. Our rights are too numerous to list.

Okay you can read, work on the comprehension.

 

[PVS]

The bill of rights is a bit of a misnomer, practically speaking it is a bill of prohibitions upon the government. Our rights are too numerous to list.

Okay you can read, work on the comprehension.

pointing out that the bill of rights does not encompass all of our basic human rights does nothing to prove your point that the bill of rights is not a list of citizen's rights (as in civil liberties).

look, its a silly thing to argue this so believe what you want.

 

[GrowTech]

Point of this thread: Banana cream pie kicks ass.

 

[londonfog]

Apple pie is American ... lol

 

[PVS]

when the admin shuts this down can we have a pie forum?

 

[fdd2blk]

wooooo hoooooo, more PIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Xeno420]

...this post makes no sense.

We do not have constitutional rights. The constitution was meant as a way to set boundaries for government, not us.

What he is trying to say is that we 'do' have constitutional rights but really, the constitution was made to control the government, not us. "He's probab;y way stoned and wasn't in the right frame of mind".

 

[Xeno420]

did i start posting just before fdd brought his fist down? or is he just joking

yes they have the right to organize in a mob and storm the town hall if they so choose

only if the meeting is with intentions of harm or wrongful subordination.

 

[Rob Roy]

pointing out that the bill of rights does not encompass all of our basic human rights does nothing to prove your point that the bill of rights is not a list of citizen's rights (as in civil liberties).

look, its a silly thing to argue this so believe what you want.

My original point is to show the distinction between "constitutional rights" and unalienable rights. Using the term "Constitutional rights" could be construed as our rights coming from the government. Unalienable rights, which we are supposed to have, do not come from the government and are not subject to government amendment or manipulation.
Agreed?

I was merely trying to point out to anyone reading the thread that there is an important distinction between"god given" rights and "government given" rights.

I fear we are in a cultural transition stage, where a lot of people are unaware of the origin of their rights and have them confused with "permissions" or priveledges granted by the government.

 

[fdd2blk]

why is Mc Cain kicking rowdy people out of his meetings? i'm trying to find the clip but it doesn't seem to be posted yet.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dawn-teo/next-door-to-mccain-town_b_270106.html

"Meanwhile, just around the corner (less than a mile away), Obama's former presidential campaign rival, Senator John McCain, hosted a town hall for a raucous crowd that alternated between booing and cheering. One protester had to be forcibly removed when she kept interrupting the town hall by shouting. The crowd was divided between those who adamantly support health care reform (about one-third of the crowd) and those who adamantly oppose it (about two-thirds of the crowd), and both sides were vocal throughout the town hall."

 

[londonfog]

Old and short tempered....Man just think if he was President and another country pissed him off...bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran

 

[fdd2blk]

i'm kinda feeling silly for voting for Obama.

i am thankful i didn't vote for Mc Cain.

 

[londonfog]

Sometimes you are force to vote for the lesser of the two evils, but I think Obama will do some good

 

[PVS]

My original point is to show the distinction between "constitutional rights" and unalienable rights. Using the term "Constitutional rights" could be construed as our rights coming from the government. Unalienable rights, which we are supposed to have, do not come from the government and are not subject to government amendment or manipulation.
Agreed?

disagreed.

yes it is a set of rules governing the government, which serves to enforce our inalienable rights.

for instance your right to not have some gustapo break in your home with no cause and warrant, drag you to some foreign prison without charging you, allow you no legal representation, and torture you to death....ok so maybe thats happened a few times, but that only serves to illustrate the direct connection between constitutional amendments and human rights.

the bill of rights is designed to prevent the possibility of government violating our basic human right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

 

[fdd2blk]

apparently it's ok to shout at Obama, but not Mc Cain?


"You're going to have to stop or you're going to have to leave," McCain told the woman. When security guards approached to escort her out, he told her "Goodbye, see ya" to a round of applause.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090827/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_mccain


[youtube]5BIlVGzziQk[/youtube]






so to answer the OP question; NO.