"Are Women People?"

I don't think anything you said here adds to, rather than detracts from, your points. What did I say that was a strawman?

As for money, it IS my property. The actual physical currency as minted by the gov is not, but I have the right to possession. Besides, very little of my money is in bills or coins, so that weak point even fails there. If you go from libertarian to centrist then you are making big jumps, and I seriously can't imagine you as a libertarian, since you act far left.

I suggest reading up on what the Federal Reserve system is and who owns it (hint: it's not the government).

Currency is worthless without the means to back it up.

LOL you would have been better with the ballot challenge. So those KWAAAAZY Republicans challenged Obamacare and "lost," even though the final verdict has not been reached - the USSC obviously thinks it is worth their time to decide it. They CORRECTLY challenged the constitutionality of Obamacare, and you think that is the GOP attempting to subvert the USC? That's quite the stretch. I guess you feel desperate times call for desperate measures...

Please cite where in the USC it is provided for.



/popcorn

not really as I can grasp both sides instead of just trying the one sided argument that socialism is somehow evil.

attacking me instead of going after the points is classic strawman.

No, it isn't your property, it belongs not to you, the US government can retract all their currency and make it void.

That's not a big jump, and was mildly.

I act nothing of the sort, I just detest the GoP and their religious nut balls who know nothing about what they say they are for far more than liberals who are typically at least trying to do good instead of lining rich *** pockets.

This is a red herring. The bottom line is if I earn it, it should be mine, with federal taxes being limited to only that for which Congress has authority BY THE USC to confiscate. Other taxes should be limited to state and local governments. It's NOT right to have money taken from me to build public housing in Chicago or to research cow farts in California. Just because they DO it doesn't mean they are doing it LEGALLY.

You know if you don't like the idea of a country providing health care to its citizen I'm sure there are still a few countries out there that feel the same way you do.

America is actually trying to catch up with the rest of the world in this regard. It's doubtful though with all the backwards, archaic thinking though.

GOP and unconstitutionality, as of late. You wanted 3, I believe?

- Banning gay marriage ruled unconstitutional and Rick Santorum, GOP frontrunner, publicly states his goal to ban gay marriage and nullify existing marriages.

- GOP bill being pushed to force Michigan students to recite pledge, despite West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette (1943) declaring it unconstitutional to force students to salute or pledge to the flag.

- GOP tried to push a bill in Wisconsin mandating photo ID be required to vote, found unconstitutional.

I'd give many more, but I'm hunting Rodrigo de Borgia.

they didn't correctly challenge anything, nobody can challenge a federal law by arguing that it conflicts with a state law, your lack of reading comprehension is deplorable.


commerce clause, and as for my other point supremacy clause.

they have a right to take all of it really as it is theirs not yours.

You read but don't understand.

if you don't want to pay taxes get paid in foreign currency and trade in it too.

Let me know how that works for you.

The US gov cannot come in my house and confiscate my private property without cause, at least legally. Also you confuse strawman with ad hominem. "Classic" my ***.
As for "religious nutballs", you are just a sucker for stereotypes. There is more religion on the left, with the understanding that environmentalism and statism and even atheism bear all the markings of religion. Also, theGOP is not about increasing the wealth of the wealthy, and if you don't like people whose power only serves to give themselves more power, see Obama and all his czars for examples on the left. There is plenty of that on both sides, but the left is worse. Why do you think all these rich guys donate to Obama, like Soros, and Buffett, and Gates? It's all for favors. We only want rich people to have money because A. they shouldn't have to pay for everyone else's lifestyles, and B.(more importantly) they CREATE JOBS. I'm not in lock-step with the GOP by any means, and I know there is corruption and imperfection, but socialism is bad for all, unless you know of a thriving socialist country. I have friends in Venezuela who had to quit FFXI for example because Chavez decided that his minions couldn't spend more than ~$100 per year online. Is that level of control, government telling you what you can eat and whose activities you have to subsidize, what you really want?

Actually that is not entirely true. Money can be worth whatever people think it is, regardless of what is backing it.

Like let's say that there was an apocalypse and people used money as a way of trade and people still thought it had value. There would be nothing backing it but people still might trade and accept it.

Also about the government paying for abortions thing.

The government does indeed pay for abortions. But as far as I know, only rape victims can apply for financial aid for it that comes from the government. They must provide some sort of proof they were raped, such as doctor visits and criminal reports. But yeah, it's government paid.

They do not, at least not legally. If your only justification is that the big govt does whatever it wants like Obama appointing "recess" appointments without there being a recess, then that is not a "right." Can they PHYSICALLY do it? Yes. Can they LEGALLY do it? No.

And I'm off to the gym. Tune in another day for more schooling.

don't make me get started on to how atheism isn't a religion, please.

no the right is filled with political religion, the left isn't.

the GoP is all for increasing the wealth of the wealthy, why do you think they support unrestricted capitalism? it allows for monopolies, it's also why they are trying to say anti child labor laws are unconstitutional, it's a crock of ***you're spewing.

The rich may create jobs (and short of recently they haven't created many in the *** 8 years they've had taxes reduced).

but the rich keep getting richer, it's society that allows them to get that way, police etc, that everyone pays for, we want our cut back.

Unrestricted socialism is bad, but so is unrestricted crony capitalism (our current government).

You need a healthy mix, otherwise you're going to get ***.

Full on socialism has it's merits but it's flawed by the same thing that flaws capitalism: greed.

they do have a right to take it as it is theirs anyway.

legally.

don't get started on that *** as it's not even true.

oh as to the government going in your house: patriot act says hi.

That last part would at least explain where the government is killing babies argument comes from.

First, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain . While the government has to give you what they think it's worth, they can take your property at any time.

Also back when my dad was buying houses, the government was going into houses that people owned and calling them condemned. They would then go ahead and smash the building and send the person who owned it the bill. Keep in mind that these are people who bought the property expecting to repair it and resell it. So the government has a lot of ways to mess with your property.

Also from Clark Howard:

"What remains indisputably true is that big businesses only increase hiring by .1 percent in a typical year. That's not even statistically significant!"

So they don't really create as many jobs as you think. While big business may employ many people and have some of the best paying jobs out there, they don't actually increase hiring at all.

EDIT: Clark Howard for those who don't know is a talk show host who is a financial expert. He has no stake politically, he only talks about economics. He is very famous and credible.

no they don't:

see the Hyde ammendment.

(not sure on the rape victim thing though, which for most is a different story anyway, but I don't feel like researching it right now).

Are Women People?

Hmm...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say... yes...?

I know someone who works at an abortion clinic. That's where I'm getting this info btw.

Found proof:

r's Note: On Thursday, House Republicans, facing an onslaught of outside pressure, decided to remove the controversial "forcible rape" provision from their "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act." The original language from the Hyde Amendment—which bans federal funding for abortions through Medicaid except in cases of rape, incest, or to save a mother's life

k

I much rather pay for a woman's Birth Control they play for lazy *** *** people that refuse to get a job.

that sir is a false dichotomy

No. not really because I'm not saying my only choices are to pay for BC or pay for well-fare. I'm saying if I had my choice on where my tax money went, I'd rather it goes for that.

Right so like the definition of a false dichotomy because you've structured your choice such that it is between those two things when really it isn't.

Okay, smart ***.

I'd rather my taxes go to pay for birth control, then many other services they go far, such as well-fare.

Better? Because I'm sure you totally thought I thought my taxes were only going to be able to go for one or the other.

OFF TOPIC MADNESS!

I was dragged out by friends and it was scary as hell but I did it!

Opening this thread was like stepping on a mental dog turd.