White House Threatens Veto of Cybersecurity Bill

Phoenix333 said:
My rights are granted by God. Try to take them from me and you'll see how far my rights extend, as well as my talons. Try to take them from those I love and I'll gut you on the spot. If you don't believe in God and use that as an excuse to try to take my rights I can arrange a personal introduction for you.

As for the State... read the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. Try to get the concept of "consent of the governed" through all that pinko crap you've been spoon fed. If you're a statist socialist yourself, then understand this. You and those like you are going to learn the hard way that those who truly love liberty are not going to give it up without a fight. King George learned this the hard way a few hundred years ago.
Click to expand...

I can't help but :rolleyes: at the ultra-patriot rhetoric. No one's treading on you. The irony of the bizarre religious justifications of murder you've injected here is that there's a commandment made of all people. It says "Thou Shalt not Kill".

Even if you believe rights come from god, you must realize they're only ever put to paper in documents written by man, i.e. the state. Therefore, the liberty you enjoy is granted, defined, and protected by the state's law. In fact, the concept of "rights" is entirely a human invention. The rights granted by authority of the state are all any person on earth really has. Absent that, there is anarchy; Where you'd have freedom to move and do, but only insofar as no one else arbitrarily wanted to stop you.

You suggested we hold in contempt anyone who "threatens" liberty. Understand though that liberty is a malleable thing. Its boundaries have shifted under the weight of the changing circumstance of history. We've certainly seen that over the past 12 years in this country. The liberty you enjoy hasn't and may not always be there. If you don't like that, threaten to vote, not kill.
 
I think he is "threatening it" because if people see he is going to do something, then they might think there is no reason to act out or protest, so then he can claim he saw no resistance to the bill and deicded to turn around and let it through.
 
Sycraft said:
Ya right. The president is a nothing. He hasn't actually stood up for any of the things he's talked about, near as I can tell. He claimed ot have real concerns about the NDAA, but signed it anyhow.
Click to expand...

It didnt matter if the prez signed the NDAA or not. It was veto proof as it passed in the house and senate by 3/4 majority vote or better.

I am not taking up for the prez but lets lay the facts on the table, the NDAA was veto proof and would have been law no matter what.

CISPA will rise to the same fate, 3/4 majority vote and its a done deal. its all politics and they will win one way or another.
 
And let me add this, the prez mouthing off like he did about NDAA and giving the impression that he is against it was all talk and no go. All that mouthing off was for show and to try to make us think that he cared which he does not.

All talk and no go ......................
 
MrGuvernment said:
So revolt and kick em out of office.. oh wait, that would involve people getting off their asses out from in front of their TV's and computers and doing something about it, instead of signing useless online petitions people toss up.
Click to expand...

That would end up as basically an Occupy Wallstreet gathering vs the US military. Good luck kicking these fools out of office. It would take sooooooooo many people to gather to actually make that happen, and frankly i think that the gov is smart enough not to piss everyone off that much.
 
chockomonkey said:
That would end up as basically an Occupy Wallstreet gathering vs the US military. Good luck kicking these fools out of office. It would take sooooooooo many people to gather to actually make that happen, and frankly i think that the gov is smart enough not to piss everyone off that much.
Click to expand...

^^ THIS QFT

The gov will keep the sheeple happy and full of welfare, EBT cards, unemployment benifits and well you just name it.

The sheep of the USA rise up LOL aint going to happen.
 
Hamish Campbell said:
I can't help but :rolleyes: at the ultra-patriot rhetoric. No one's treading on you. The irony of the bizarre religious justifications of murder you've injected here is that there's a commandment made of all people. It says "Thou Shalt not Kill".

Even if you believe rights come from god, you must realize they're only ever put to paper in documents written by man, i.e. the state. Therefore, the liberty you enjoy is granted, defined, and protected by the state's law. In fact, the concept of "rights" is entirely a human invention. The rights granted by authority of the state are all any person on earth really has. Absent that, there is anarchy; Where you'd have freedom to move and do, but only insofar as no one else arbitrarily wanted to stop you.

You suggested we hold in contempt anyone who "threatens" liberty. Understand though that liberty is a malleable thing. Its boundaries have shifted under the weight of the changing circumstance of history. We've certainly seen that over the past 12 years in this country. The liberty you enjoy hasn't and may not always be there. If you don't like that, threaten to vote, not kill.
Click to expand...

He might mean to defend oneself against this tyranny. You can certainly defend yourself (according to the bible). Also, before there was paper men imprinted liberty in their minds. Millions (billions?) fought and died for it long before some (recent) humans chose to write it down.

Therefore, the liberty I enjoy is granted, defined, and protected by the men and women that have died and will die, to keep it!

Where you'd have freedom to move and do, but only insofar as no one else arbitrarily wanted to stop you.
Click to expand...

This is present with or without the states interference.


Also, vote? What democracy? I don't see (a real) one! We have more guns than people in this country. The government should remember that! That said, I will vote for Ron Paul, I just get the feeling it won't help because the government is too big and too corrupted. I believe the presidential elections are preordained. Remember those words. What you see is a show, an entertaining show. Think Opera!
 
AnonymousUser said:
Therefore, the liberty I enjoy is granted, defined, and protected by the men and women that have died and will die, to keep it!
Click to expand...

Except that it's really not. That rosy ideal may sound good, but ultimately all that stands between you and total dysfunction is a social contract bound and maintained by the rule of law. Laws are flexible and the protections to liberty they afford will change.
 
Hamish Campbell said:
Except that it's really not. That rosy ideal may sound good, but ultimately all that stands between you and total dysfunction is a social contract bound and maintained by the rule of law. Laws are flexible and the protections to liberty they afford will change.
Click to expand...

Actually it is!
 
Exavior said:
History? I have a Christian school by me that has taught the kids for years to hate all that don't go to heir school. Then know of two Calvery churches that spread hate messages to their members. One states that you should not work for a company that hires Catholics, does business with companies owned by Catholics, how you should beat up and injure Catholics. If you see a catholic woman getting beat and raped you should help the people attacking her but not actually rape her yourself as God wants you to help her be punished but doesn't want you to have sex with them in any manor. The other one is Antijewish and has similar thoughts as the other, but with jews instead of catholic. So no, it isn't just what the education system teaches. That really is how a lot of churches teach their followers in areas. Either you follow our teachings or you are to be hated and treated like shit.
Click to expand...
Everything you said there is so terribly unchristian. If they actually believed in the christian God and opened their bibles and read them they'd be pissing themselves with fear over acting like that and teaching that.
 
Tudz said:
Everything you said there is so terribly unchristian. If they actually believed in the christian God and opened their bibles and read them they'd be pissing themselves with fear over acting like that and teaching that.
Click to expand...

Yea i've been to a lot of churches, but never seen hate-preach like that. I've never heard them even touch topics like other religions because they're so controversial.

Where are these churches?
 
Exavior said:
I have a Christian school by me that has taught the kids for years to hate all that don't go to heir school.
Click to expand...
Judging everyone by the actions of some extremists is bad. The Bible I have says to love your enemies, bless those that curse you, and do good unto them that despitefully use you. If they're reading the same bible I'm not quite sure how they're arriving at that mindset.

Hamish Campbell said:
No one's treading on you.
Click to expand...
Good. I detest violence and I am loathe to participate in it.

The irony of the bizarre religious justifications of murder you've injected here is that there's a commandment made of all people. It says "Thou Shalt not Kill".
Click to expand...
In the Hebrew it is "Thou shalt do no murder". Murder is not the same as killing in self defense, or when the law authorizes it. You might read Leviticus and Deuteronomy a bit more closely. You'll see that in many cases people were to be stoned to death for certain crimes. Beyond that, Old Testament law was given to the Hebrews, not the Gentiles. I am not an Orthodox Jew, and thus I am not under the law. In addition, it is written that anyone that keeps the whole law perfectly yet stumbles in a single point is guilty of all of it. Nobody is justified by the law, and Jesus said that "If a man hates his brother without cause then he is a murderer in his heart". Motives are as important as deeds. The apostle Paul, formerly Saul of Tarsus was a Pharisee that was directly and indirectly responsible for the deaths of over 5,000 Christian believers in his day, before God converted him to be one of his most effective disciples. So then, is Paul to be condemned by Christians for his killings and lauded by the Pharisees of his day, or condemned by the Pharisees and lauded by Christians for his conversion and witness? You could learn a lot from Paul's life lessons, and how beneath the surface of words there are much more complex currents that ebb and flow and are not always apparent. It is very easy for the ignorant to point fingers and cast judgment on things they do not understand. Understanding, after all, requires effort.

You should also notice the Boolean condition in my arguments. The word "IF" is extremely important. I am not threatening violence against anyone because nobody has yet threatened me or those I love. Outlining cause and effect is not a threat. If I say to someone, "If you fall from that cliff you will die," that does not count as a threat to that person. I might ask you - do you dislike the concept of liberty? Do you like simply doing as you're told, and never questioning the authority of those who tell you?

In fact, the concept of "rights" is entirely a human invention
Click to expand...
You don't study nature much do you? There are rules of acceptable conduct among animals, particularly between members of the same species. Beyond that, if rights are nothing more than allowed behavior as written on paper and the State is the ultimate source of rights, as the Socialists believe, then there are no rights because there are no guarantees. Government is supposed to exist to secure and protect the rights of the people, and the people give up personal rights only at their consent - hence the term consent of the governed. The government's job is to ensure that nobody tramples on the rights of anyone else. If the government fails to do its job then the people have the power to replace it. That is the cornerstone of American government. It is why the First and Second Amendments were added to the Constitution; The First to protect people from censorship, the Second to keep the government in fear of the people and prevent it from becoming totalitarian in nature. Remember the Arab Spring? That's an example of how the state is subject to the people - not the other way around. The State can only control the people so long as the people are willing to allow it. Injustice will eventually result in revolution, which brings me to your next point:

The liberty you enjoy hasn't and may not always be there. If you don't like that, threaten to vote, not kill.
Click to expand...

Have you read this before:

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
Click to expand...

Voting is fine, and everyone should vote, but it is critical that people understand what kind of country they're creating for future generations through their votes. It is also necessary for them to understand their rights and duties as intended by the founders of the country, should the government cease to listen.
 
Phoenix333 said:
Government is supposed to exist to secure and protect the rights of the people, and the people give up personal rights only at their consent - hence the term consent of the governed. The government's job is to ensure that nobody tramples on the rights of anyone else. If the government fails to do its job then the people have the power to replace it. That is the cornerstone of American government. It is why the First and Second Amendments were added to the Constitution; The First to protect people from censorship, the Second to keep the government in fear of the people and prevent it from becoming totalitarian in nature.
Click to expand...

I just read the first and second amendments, and i don't see in there the ability for the people to replace the government. how exactly do we go about this? it needs to happen asap imo lol
 
chockomonkey said:
I just read the first and second amendments, and i don't see in there the ability for the people to replace the government. how exactly do we go about this? it needs to happen asap imo lol
Click to expand...

That part is in the Declaration of Independence. See my previous post.
 
Politics and religion are two things that should *never* be discussed on an anonymous forum. Things get way, way out of hand. :/
 
Write your politicians to not support CISPA like many of us did to have them not support SOPA/PIPA. There's a link to it from EFF's website (eff.org) w/ the template and all. :cool:
 
Sycraft said:
Ya right. The president is a nothing. He hasn't actually stood up for any of the things he's talked about, near as I can tell. He claimed ot have real concerns about the NDAA, but signed it anyhow.
Click to expand...

+1

Obama is a pushover, he won't veto this.
 
Ruoh said:
Politics and religion are two things that should *never* be discussed on an anonymous forum. Things get way, way out of hand. :/
Click to expand...

How do you avoid them though? They're intertwined with everything in life. The problem is that they are never actually discussed - they're argued. It's always "I'm right, you're wrong. I'm smart, and you're an idiot". There's always someone that wants to go on the attack which forces someone on the other side to defend their position, then the agitators start, and it spirals out of control until someone locks the topic or the next flamewar starts in another thread. The more reasonable voices get lost, shouted down by the people who simply want to argue. It's the Greater Internet F*#@wad Theory in action.

The alternative is to ban any comments dealing with religion and politics, but where does that get you? Censorship isn't the answer. Banning people for being rude and impolite and excessively off-topic is usually the best course of action, but you need a small army of moderators for that on a large board like this. Besides, it doesn't stop the worst offenders. Some people have just enough cleverness to stir up trouble without getting called out for it. I've been admin on a message board for over 10 years and I've pretty much seen it all.
 
Phoenix333 said:
How do you avoid them though? They're intertwined with everything in life. The problem is that they are never actually discussed - they're argued. It's always "I'm right, you're wrong. I'm smart, and you're an idiot".
Click to expand...

Welcome to the human condition. I don't want to get booted from the thread for not being OT, so I'll leave it at that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top