Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court Justice Commits Sedition By Telling People to Revolt Over Income Taxes [View all]CFLDem
(2,083 posts)73. Actually according to our nation's founding fathers-
"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 of 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 shewn, 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."
I don't think we should exercise this right as we haven't reached absolute despotism. The system still kind of works and we should use it until it doesn't.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
106 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Supreme Court Justice Commits Sedition By Telling People to Revolt Over Income Taxes [View all]
CatWoman
Apr 2014
OP
Rachel Maddow once called Scalia a Troll. The guy on the internet who says shit
KittyWampus
Apr 2014
#46
Yeah, it was named at scalia.. I would never make a personal attack of calling someone an
Cha
Apr 2014
#84
JHC, Alerted on for calling Scalia an "asshole".. I woulda thought it was self-evident..
Cha
Apr 2014
#83
It is funny.. I'm glad there were 5 thinking jurors, though.. whew! again, thank you
Cha
Apr 2014
#98
Nobody has the right to intimidate law enforcement with guns and then call it peaceful assembly.
JDPriestly
Apr 2014
#37
Their intent was not to protest outside their tent, but on the streets, in front of the banks.
DhhD
Apr 2014
#49
Sedition: "Conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of a state."
rhett o rick
Apr 2014
#62
Under US law it doesn't matter what it might do. The question is whether it it does so.
onenote
Apr 2014
#69
Scalia is nothing but a glorified partisan hack! He revels in the fact that the normal rules
Dustlawyer
Apr 2014
#11
Well he probably is safe from impeachment as long as Republicans hold the House
Samantha
Apr 2014
#28
Next he will be wearing a winter ermine collar with a reversible brown one, with a sewn in label
DhhD
Apr 2014
#50
But this isn't sedition any more than my calling for revolution while protesting the Vietnam War
onenote
Apr 2014
#25
Somehow I don't think a revolt would work out the way Fat Tony thinks it would
Exposethefrauds
Apr 2014
#41
And now too, he should stay off interstate highways paid for by federal tax revenue.
DhhD
Apr 2014
#52
That's my thought - doesn't he (and his rich buddies) need us to pay our taxes?
erronis
Apr 2014
#60
It may be your definition of sedition, but it isn't the definition that the courts have applied
onenote
Apr 2014
#55
They can be started as soon as the House agrees to start them. So don't hold your breath.
onenote
Apr 2014
#70
It just shows how corrupt this government has become in 34 years since Reagan .
geretogo
Apr 2014
#72
With instant news and so many other inventions it's probably just more noticeable
nolabels
Apr 2014
#75
Exactly . Fox News is the Trojan hoarse entering homes and altering peoples perception of
geretogo
Apr 2014
#77
Ater I read that I feel we are coming close to the words in the last three sentences . I guess it
geretogo
Apr 2014
#78
High taxes are relative . In the Nordic countries taxes are high but most goes back to the people
geretogo
Apr 2014
#79
2016:Primary for your choice of POTUS, but at the polls elect a Dem,any Dem. If you don't understand
Hekate
Apr 2014
#80
If revolt is justified by high taxes, what should we do about stolen elections? n/t
lumberjack_jeff
Apr 2014
#86
I think he would have had to be more specific than that for it to be called sedition.
totodeinhere
Apr 2014
#102