Coming soon - Get a detailed view of why an account is flagged as spam!
view details

This post has been de-listed

It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.

1,764
Did I hear Biden correctly? “No amendment in the constitution is absolute”- Joe Biden
Post Body

He finally said it. The stupid fool finally said it. “No amendment in the constitution is absolute” sentence spooked the ever living hell out of me. I can’t believe he said that. They told me Trump was a dictator but then Biden says this?

I didn’t vote for Trump nor did a vote for Biden but I viewed, and still view both as idiots and Biden saying what he said solidified that for me. Does this mean the 1st amendment is on the table for him as well? What about the 5th, 6th, 13th, 15th, 18th, 19th? 21st, 22nd, and 25th?

The moment he guts the 2nd I believe he’ll go after the others. What can we the people do now? What is expected of us?

Comments
[not loaded or deleted]

My rights come from the founders who had the balls to fight for them

My rights existed before the founders were born. My rights existed before anyone thought of the idea of rights. I share the right to life with all beings on this planet. A lion hunts when it is hungry, but its prey still evolved to fight back.

Rights based on the will of people are not rights at all. Recognizing a right is different than granting a right—something which by definition cannot happen. A right is an inherent trait with which a creature is born, and which they will have their entire existence.

Laws should be designed to punish those who would tread upon the rights of others, not oppress groups of people en masse. The way the constitution is written is to use negative law (e.g.: “congress shall make no law...”) to limit the strength of government, rather than allow people to be granted privileges.

The semantic argument over “god-given,” “natural,” or “inalienable” does not help gun-owners. Understanding the intent behind the phrase and just rolling along with it is the correct decision. I neither hold nor practice a faith, but I will still use “god-given rights” or “bless you” in conversation. It is common language which conveys meaning quickly and clearly. If anything, refusing to see that is a willful misunderstanding and attempt to fracture discussion.

[not loaded or deleted]

Interesting take. I’m working on some reviewing SCOTUS decisions and this one hadn’t crossed my desk. Thanks for sharing, I’ll be looking into it further.

[not loaded or deleted]

You keep saying your legal rights come from the founders. That’s the assertion which isn’t true. They merely codified them and held that the government couldn’t take them away. Those rights existed long before they were written down.

[not loaded or deleted]

Warnock used his pulpit and perceived authority from it to campaign.

[not loaded or deleted]

Basing your argument on god when it is not necessary is just ineffective, and will get through to less people

That same god was just used to get an anti-gun senator elected in GA; saying it’s ineffective is equivalent to burying one’s head in the sand and pretending it didn’t happen.

Author
Account Strength
100%
Account Age
11 years
Verified Email
Yes
Verified Flair
No
Total Karma
34,356
Link Karma
14,725
Comment Karma
19,004
Profile updated: 3 days ago

Subreddit

Post Details

We try to extract some basic information from the post title. This is not always successful or accurate, please use your best judgement and compare these values to the post title and body for confirmation.
Posted
3 years ago