Originally Posted by rodrigu3

We didn't have a military - so we must have had militias when the amendment was written. Each state had their own. Personally, I have nothing against people owning guns - but there's no reason for people to have semi-automatics, sniper rifles (unless of the hunting variety), or any other high-powered rifle, automatic or not. The problem is that our Democracy does not work because the government is afraid of our guns, they're afraid of our vote. Guns don't help us keep our freedom, voting does.

The language of the second amendment is not as clear as you make it out to be. Moreover, that is complicated by the fact that the context changes over time. What does it mean by the people? Citizens? Non-citizens? Etc. This is for the courts to decide, not you or me. This may be your interpretation, but you offer no facts, no precedents, and no reasonable justification for it.

Originally Posted by frodly

What ends were they trying to accomplish by being for states rights and limited government? If you can't answer that, your statement has little truth. I believe limited government was always a core issue, because it goes hand in hand with individual rights! That is the ends, for limited government.

Originally Posted by KOD

The simple truth is that there are two basic beliefs................one touting freedom as the best enforcer of fairness, and the other supporting government as the best enforcer. Any and all variances to these two opposing views exist solely for the convience of the "believer" in justifying his specific selfish desires. This is why most who claim to be "moderates" or "independents" are only attempting to validate some selfish desire that they realize runs contradictory to their main thought process. Consistency is not in their intellectual capacity due to emotional needs.

Originally Posted by frodly

The very unsimple truth is that there are not 2 sides defined in the way you define them! One side touts one type of freedom(the ones they like), and the other side another(the ones they like)! During other times one side touts government as the best enforcer(when people start getting freedoms they dont like) and want government expansion!

You are either blinded to reality at every turn, or you are as I have suspected a conservative posting stupid stuff to make liberals look bad! I have to imagine you could find better things to do!

Originally Posted by catzmeow

I consider myself a conservative democrat:

1) I'm libertarian on most social issues, live and let live. That means I support the right of gays to marry, and I don't really care if people get high as long as their actions don't impact me.

2) I believe in many, but not all, social programs. For instance, I support the Job Corps program and Head Start, but not the welfare system as it presently exists today. However, I am not opposed to welfare because I don't believe in providing supports to family, I am opposed to welfare because I believe it has been extremely detrimental to the people it was designed to serve: mothers and children. I would support revamping welfare to require recipients to be socialized in such a way as to be able to someday function more independently, i.e. forcing them to take classes on nutrition, food preparation, household budgeting, work skills, getting a job, and remedial education if needed.

3) I am in favor of a woman's right to choose until about the 16th week (4th month), at which point I think abortion should be illegal. I am strongly in favor of more widespread use of the morning after pill and contraceptives.

4) I support sex education in schools, but I also feel parents have to assume responsibility for this task, as well.

5) I think the educational systems around the U.S. are in need of major revamping, but I do not support vouchers.

6) I'm a hawk on foreign policy issues. i'd have no problem bombing the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of our enemies.

There are quite a few posters on this forum who consider me extremely conservative, when in reality, most of the conservatives consider me quite liberal.

Of course, #6 trumps everything for me, which is why I will be voting for McCain in November.

Originally Posted by The12thMan

The rule should never trump the reason for the rule.

Originally Posted by f0ca1

I think most Americans are like you catz, except on number 6.


Most Americans are realizing "shoot first, ask questions later" really sucks, once the shooting is over.

Originally Posted by The12thMan

The rule should never trump the reason for the rule.

Originally Posted by sunnyside

Let Billybob sport hunt humpback whales and things might be different.

Originally Posted by The12thMan

The rule should never trump the reason for the rule.

Originally Posted by frodly

The very unsimple truth is that there are not 2 sides defined in the way you define them! One side touts one type of freedom(the ones they like), and the other side another(the ones they like)! During other times one side touts government as the best enforcer(when people start getting freedoms they dont like) and want government expansion!

You are either blinded to reality at every turn, or you are as I have suspected a conservative posting stupid stuff to make liberals look bad! I have to imagine you could find better things to do!