Free speech has been misinterpreted the same way where it only relates to the government not enacting laws to, say, make you take Scientology classes because they decided it was really cool.
When lawmakers screw up there might be a better solution than going right for the lethal injection. Like maybe the Supreme Court can review what’s going on. Booze is a great example. Oops! We screwed up! And who knows, maybe they’ll reverse the reversal. Guns are a good example, too. The key wording is about “the people” and “the militia” and hadn’t always been regarded unanimously, by the highest court in the land. Heller versus District of Columbia in 2008 was 5-4. Let me do the math....ummm... that’s about as close as you can get for a decision. I’m in the unpopular minority and think that the Second Amendment should be further amended. So I’m technically wrong, as far as the law goes. I really don’t think I should be put to death for it.
One only needs look at our current political situation to see that there’s a lot of Fail out there. Wanting change is all well and good.
But when you start manufacturing evidence through gematria to support your case you are only proving you are totally unqualified to have your opinion taken seriously. Listen to yourselves and your evidence, which is a crime to decency to even call evidence. Tranny spotting. Numbers that could mean anything MUST mean your interpretation. This perSON has an SON in their last name so they’re evil. An S looks like a 5. Rocky Road ice cream reminds me of Sylvester Stallone.
You’re dropping the “I think” part of these conjectures. I think he look like a girl. I think 113 means the mainstream media is dishonest. I think Woodrow Wilson is evil because he’s got the hoax -son code in his name. I think 3.142857 is close enough to Pi. Blah, blah, blah, blah.
And it’s not just “I think”. More properly it’s, “I think without any empirical evidence whatsoever that these things are true”. Believe it or not, and since you have taken some time to talk about Constitutional law I think you do, there are some honest people trying to make this country a better place that have gone through some process that qualifies them. Education, experience. Compared to “I can spot a tranny instantly!”
A straw man argument, yes, but go ahead and substitute what you think is your best argument here and I’m sure I’ve covered it previously.
Get a real argument and if it’s convincing I’ll be your BFF forever. Which is probably not the greatest argument for me to use, because like Hubbard’s 10,000 patrons I don’t see it happening. A false promise.
In the meantime I’m pretty sure the Supreme Court is going to agree with my interpretation of the ambiguous 113:
No comments:
Post a Comment