Welcome to the BDSM Library.
  • Login:
beymenslotgir.com kalebet34.net escort bodrum bodrum escort
Results 1 to 30 of 279

Threaded View

  1. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    NA
    Posts
    869
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
    Funny thing: neither were the Ten Commandments.
    Yes they were.


    Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
    My, oh my, he really does want the colonies back, doesn't he?
    Well, after you left the Empire and went your own sweet way, we did quite well without your help ... reluctant and tardy though it was, and are still doing reasonably well for a nation the size of Kentucky and the population of California and Texas. So come back if you want to: there's always a welcome for the prodigal son.

    However, I doubt many Americans could stomach the tolerant, socially aware lifestyle that prevails in European and Commonwealth nations and it would rebel once again ... I hope not by provoking another world war like it did the first time.


    Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
    In truth, though, these men who stole the land from the Crown (who stole it for themselves simply by weight of arms) were perfectly willing to pay taxes, provided they had some representation in Parliament about how those taxes were used.
    We obtained the colonies by conquest and settlement. Not necessarily noble means of acquisition, but far better than stealing from one's own compatriots: that's treachery.

    As for taxation in return for representation, that was mere posturing: (a) you could have had it if you really wanted it; (b) America was already becoming more and more republican in response to the belief that Britain was a den of iniquity and that the only way to prevent the disease from infecting the colonies was to secede; (c) it preferred to trade with the enemy; (d) it wanted to occupy more and more Indian or French territory, despite British Treaties recognising the rights of the Indians/French ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Thorne View Post
    All quite true, which is part of the beauty of the document. It was designed to be adaptable, allowing for change when necessary. Which means it's not fundamentally flawed, unless you disagree with the notion that the government should be "of the people, by the people, and for the people". There seems to be a growing group within the government who have forgotten, or ignored, that statement. They want people who are servants OF the government, controlled BY the government, and existing only FOR the government to abuse.
    A beautiful, adaptable, versatile document can still be fundamentally flawed if its provisions are found wanting ...

    You final statement reeks of the rantings of the radical right, which does not represent the People at all, but simply a vocal minority paranoid at the prospect of a legally constituted government actually taking its role and responsibilities seriously.
    Last edited by MMI; 05-24-2010 at 04:23 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top