General Discussion

TheKentuckian

(26,314 posts)

127. EXACTLY! This is why we fight for civil rights (access) for all. Logic dictates it!

Mon Dec 1, 2014, 12:04 AM

Dec 2014

Decency demands it.

Relaxation that we are all human requires it. Recognizing a person's civil rights is recognizing their humanity and accepting that human's citizenship.

Any limitations are to ensure one person's exercise of their rights do not encumber another's ability to exercise their's. Anything else is a corruption, an erosion, and undoing of the protection of the natural right.

I guess what I fail to understand is how you discern what is a right and what is a liberty or are you saying the principle of equal protection must not be subject to the will of the people but what the protections actually are is up for debate or something else yet still.

It isn't what it said that needs repeating but what has to be yet unsaid that needs to be added to actually understand what you are aiming for and what your current perceptions and positions on these matters are.
This is why I wanted to be clear to you what my logic and perceptions are, to give you a bridge for common language.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

179 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What Civil Rights are you willing to give up? [View all] marym625 Nov 2014 OP

None cantbeserious Nov 2014 #1

^ That many Socal31 Nov 2014 #2

Neither am I. marym625 Nov 2014 #3

I have noticed that people can be absolute.. Socal31 Nov 2014 #10

yep. marym625 Nov 2014 #15

Agreed. n/t meaculpa2011 Nov 2014 #59

The second. 99Forever Nov 2014 #4

Agree. FLPanhandle Nov 2014 #6

The 2A is not stopping strict gun control hack89 Nov 2014 #8

ok. That one is worthy of looking at throwing away. marym625 Nov 2014 #9

It was for armed citizens to Protect the government NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #11

But wasn't it to stop the Federal Government marym625 Nov 2014 #21

It was meant to not allow the government to prohibit arms for citizens. NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #30

the ability to fight the federal government? safeinOhio Nov 2014 #44

Which was written long after marym625 Nov 2014 #48

Civilized, advanced societies all over the world... 99Forever Nov 2014 #23

Very true marym625 Nov 2014 #32

I understand Mary. 99Forever Nov 2014 #36

Thank you marym625 Nov 2014 #38

It wouldn't hurt to reword the 2A. The interpretation has been so perverted already world wide wally Nov 2014 #37

Most definitely. n/t marym625 Nov 2014 #40

I agree VScott Nov 2014 #76

I know we can do better than that. That is the way it is attempted to be interpreted now... world wide wally Nov 2014 #98

A lot of people get that part wrong. NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #105

The 2A allows very strict regulation right now hack89 Dec 2014 #136

Actually... Taipan Nov 2014 #107

On that subject... Taipan Nov 2014 #106

Let me know how you... 99Forever Nov 2014 #116

Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2014 #143

A little too deep for you? 99Forever Dec 2014 #144

Post removed Post removed Dec 2014 #148

You're the one talking... 99Forever Dec 2014 #150

Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2014 #151

missed that marym625 Dec 2014 #166

Was a troll with 9 posts. 99Forever Dec 2014 #167

Have seen a bunch of those lately too. marym625 Dec 2014 #168

Yamamoto?....good military strategist I presume? Nt pkdu Nov 2014 #126

He was smart enough to know going to war with America was a colossal mistake hack89 Dec 2014 #137

Dec 7th mean anything to you? nt pkdu Dec 2014 #141

Pearl Harbor hack89 Dec 2014 #142

Yeah, GGJohn Dec 2014 #172

and yet, there he was, guiding the Imperial Navy till 4/1943. irisblue Dec 2014 #156

And in most of those countries, people are still able to own (some form of) firearms. nomorenomore08 Dec 2014 #165

Shitcan the 2nd mwrguy Nov 2014 #55

Also my preference, however... 99Forever Nov 2014 #60

None - Everything in the Bill of Rights is sacrosanct. Nt hack89 Nov 2014 #5

None, thank you. former9thward Nov 2014 #7

None. And those who do want to give some up deserve none as well. nt NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #12

Of course..... Socal31 Nov 2014 #13

yep. n/t marym625 Nov 2014 #25

I can't answer this question ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #14

So you are willing to throw out the 4th Amendment? marym625 Nov 2014 #16

Again, ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #18

Why be OK with either? marym625 Nov 2014 #24

Because I do not live in an abstract world ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #31

There is a reason for the saying marym625 Nov 2014 #33

Yes ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #67

If you trust, old guy Nov 2014 #74

Sometimes marym625 Nov 2014 #79

Safe from what? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Nov 2014 #19

While ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #27

But let's stow the dramatic 'if it would stop a bombing' rhetoric and look at the fact that the FBI Bluenorthwest Nov 2014 #71

That'snot dramatic rhetoric ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #75

Shamefully authoritarian and fundamentally cowardly perspectives from my point of view. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #108

Well said marym625 Nov 2014 #109

I take no offense ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #118

No, I believe typing stuff on the Internet is expressing my thoughts, as to your reality TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #123

LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #124

Yes, are you not the one that is more than happy to trade away your (and everyone else's) rights TheKentuckian Dec 2014 #134

From the time ... 1StrongBlackMan Dec 2014 #138

In exchange for what? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Nov 2014 #17

+1 ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2014 #22

I'm mostly against pistol usage. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Nov 2014 #26

Wouldn't that be a dream come true marym625 Nov 2014 #28

Lots of folks are willing to give up the 2A ileus Nov 2014 #20

Thank you. marym625 Nov 2014 #29

Civil rights and civil liberties are two different things Major Nikon Nov 2014 #34

Very true. they are different things marym625 Nov 2014 #35

All civil liberties are regulated in certain ways Major Nikon Nov 2014 #45

That freedom of movement is taken by Due Process through the 5th Amendment. NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #46

Exactly Major Nikon Nov 2014 #50

I don't tend to seperate them. NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #52

The way I see it is that is the separation Major Nikon Nov 2014 #63

What you consider civil rights are also limited at times. NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #73

That is true, but I'm not sure your example proves it Major Nikon Dec 2014 #131

I don't really understand your construct of which is which. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #110

Those two things don't always overlap Major Nikon Nov 2014 #114

The civil liberty in your example is the right to equal protection under the law TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #122

I can't think of any civil right that isn't an example of the right to equal protection Major Nikon Nov 2014 #125

EXACTLY! This is why we fight for civil rights (access) for all. Logic dictates it! TheKentuckian Dec 2014 #127

Civil liberties are and always have been up for debate and always should be Major Nikon Dec 2014 #129

Yes, yes but what are you saying is a right and what is a liberty? TheKentuckian Dec 2014 #133

Civil liberties are rights Major Nikon Dec 2014 #135

I don't know how I missed all this marym625 Dec 2014 #128

americans have demonstrated that they will give up any right in exchange for a promise of safety. Warren Stupidity Nov 2014 #39

yep. marym625 Nov 2014 #41

I, for one, welcome the increased power and control of our new authoritarian fascist overlords. Zorra Nov 2014 #42

Nope. no sarcasm thingy needed marym625 Nov 2014 #43

You forgot the sarcasm thingy... Glassunion Dec 2014 #145

Whichever rights Obama thinks I should give up. (sarcasm) Vattel Nov 2014 #47

Loving the sarcastic responses marym625 Nov 2014 #49

None-Why Not Discuss fredamae Nov 2014 #51

I'm game marym625 Nov 2014 #53

Well, the PTB only fredamae Nov 2014 #72

Well said. Thank you. n/t marym625 Nov 2014 #81

willing has nothing to do with it. If the PTB want them gone librechik Nov 2014 #54

It's because we allowed it marym625 Nov 2014 #56

They operate in more or less total secrecy librechik Nov 2014 #61

I truly don't know marym625 Nov 2014 #65

I have your rights right here easychoice Nov 2014 #57

I love this piece marym625 Nov 2014 #62

how do you define civil rights? treestar Nov 2014 #58

Excellent point marym625 Nov 2014 #64

few people have the resources to launch a legal fight against Uncle Sam easychoice Nov 2014 #69

True marym625 Nov 2014 #80

No one seems to have an answer,that is a bad thing. easychoice Nov 2014 #87

Just saw a sign marym625 Nov 2014 #89

I'm not sure that's true... TeeYiYi Nov 2014 #96

None and I'm serious about it. TheKentuckian Nov 2014 #66

The good news is rock Nov 2014 #68

True marym625 Nov 2014 #112

I wasn't disagreeing with you by the way rock Nov 2014 #119

I didn't think you were marym625 Nov 2014 #120

None. jwirr Nov 2014 #70

Absolutely none. hobbit709 Nov 2014 #77

I personally don't need a gun olddots Nov 2014 #78

Millions also don't see a reason to vote. NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #83

Never had one. never will. marym625 Nov 2014 #84

Sorry you were put through such a horrible experience. NutmegYankee Nov 2014 #86

Thank you. marym625 Nov 2014 #88

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2014 #82

You scared me marym625 Nov 2014 #85

None. ScreamingMeemie Nov 2014 #90

Thanks for that marym625 Nov 2014 #91

None sarisataka Nov 2014 #92

oh, wouldn't that be nice! n/t marym625 Nov 2014 #93

They all should be kept, but sadoldgirl Nov 2014 #94

But it's a lovely wish! n/t marym625 Nov 2014 #95

I'm in the "None" grouping as with the other posters above. Taipan Nov 2014 #97

No need for sorry marym625 Nov 2014 #113

these are not simple questions Doctor_J Nov 2014 #99

though unrealistic, it would be the second - otherwise, keep the rest. NRaleighLiberal Nov 2014 #100

How would the others be kept? Taipan Nov 2014 #101

It would require other massive changes which many wouldn't accept - which is why it is unrealistic. NRaleighLiberal Nov 2014 #102

I see. Taipan Nov 2014 #104

I think I have already given up my right to party, despite the fight to obtain it. logosoco Nov 2014 #103

Me too! marym625 Nov 2014 #115

I LIKE this topic a lot!!!! WhaTHellsgoingonhere Nov 2014 #111

I understand. marym625 Nov 2014 #117

:) WhaTHellsgoingonhere Nov 2014 #121

3rd Amendment. I'm willing to quarter soldiers in my house if necessary. True Blue Door Dec 2014 #130

Well you might be willing to marym625 Dec 2014 #132

The USA should repeal the 2nd amendment. Donald Ian Rankin Dec 2014 #139

hmm. marym625 Dec 2014 #140

Message auto-removed Name removed Dec 2014 #146

The government already has the power to strictly regulate the ownership of guns hack89 Dec 2014 #157

You speak of rights as if we have them Glassunion Dec 2014 #147

no. I know you are right marym625 Dec 2014 #153

If I absolutely HAD to choose..... AverageJoe90 Dec 2014 #149

interesting marym625 Dec 2014 #154

Zero. muntrv Dec 2014 #152

You're not alone. marym625 Dec 2014 #155

None! burrowowl Dec 2014 #158

I should count all the voters for none marym625 Dec 2014 #161

Yes Habeas Corpus burrowowl Dec 2014 #169

I agree marym625 Dec 2014 #174

The material question is: what are you willing to organize to accomplish? struggle4progress Dec 2014 #159

Love this kind of reply marym625 Dec 2014 #160

Not one, as one cannot give up a right. lonestarnot Dec 2014 #162

Not one! None! sabrina 1 Dec 2014 #163

You should not give up your civil rights! Then they win, never ever give up! akbacchus_BC Dec 2014 #164

Why would anyone be willing to give up any civil rights that their akbacchus_BC Dec 2014 #170

got me marym625 Dec 2014 #173

None.....it's why I bitch so much n/t bobGandolf Dec 2014 #171

Keep up the bitching! marym625 Dec 2014 #175

In 25 days i will be giving up many of them. I think I will survive. CBGLuthier Dec 2014 #176

What a sad statement marym625 Dec 2014 #177

Yes. I am an American citizen. CBGLuthier Dec 2014 #178

I don't blame you marym625 Dec 2014 #179