Should torturing be legal?

[mrdbeau]

Please sir, answer this. I think it is the question that most would like answered.

I want all of my points addressed, but it isn't going to happen, manimal. That's the way people who spout nonsense on the internet roll.

 

[Zeek]

Yeah, answer the question

 

[mcinfantry]

i have an idea. how about EVERYONE IN THIS THREAD ADD THIS TO YOUR SIGNATURE:

As for those who say Constitutional guarantees don't extend to non citizens, an argument can be made that they should... that seemed to be the view expressed by the majority of Founding Fathers.

please back up this statement.
that way he HAS to read it, until it is answered.... ill start.

 

[jlong]

It's true that Aaron Burr shot Alexander Hamilton. But if memory serves, their duel had nothing to do with any sort of disagreement over the Constitution.

Technically, I suppose it's inaccurate to say either were Founding Fathers, but were there other FF duels?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United_States

Retard.

 

[mcinfantry]

get FACTS out of this thread. this thread is UNSUBSTANTIATED opinions touted as FACT

 

[Swampy]

Wiki is for loosers.. Everybody knows its run by the Jews..

 

[pntbllr228]

I would say the part "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL" pretty much sums it up guys.

 

[mcinfantry]

I would say the part "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL" pretty much sums it up guys.

then why did the indians get **** on? the blacks? the english?

guys?

 

[Swampy]

Dont forget the Irish..

 

[jlong]

That quote coming from men who owned Slaves, and wouldn't let women vote, and a commoners vote only counted a portion to what an educated mans vote was. Oh! **** they don't teach those facts in school though. Oh! then there was the poll tax, to keep the poor people from voting. All in all I would say pretty much all men, were more like the educated land owners, but okay.

 

[pntbllr228]

then why did the indians get **** on? the blacks? the english?

guys?

Because life isnt fair. Because people are inherently bad and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Because people in power didnt like them. Who knows. I answered the question everyone has been asking.

The founding fathers stated their belief that all men were created equal. Whether or not people have been treated that way in America has nothing to do with what they thought.

Before you reply to anything else, I would like to know if you are satisfied with the proof I gave of the founding father's ideals. The whole "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL" line I threw out there. I believe the precursor to that statement was "WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS"

 

[jlong]

Read what I posted about the founding fathers, and you should have your answer. They weren't equal then, and aren't equal now. Why I have higher scores in school, and apply myself harder then alot of my peers? We were equal right, and how come if all are equal, don't all women take it IDB?

 

[Swampy]

*.*


Come one waiting for answer....

 

[pntbllr228]

Read what I posted about the founding fathers, and you should have your answer. They weren't equal then, and aren't equal now. Why I have higher scores in school, and apply myself harder then alot of my peers? We were equal right, and how come if all are equal, don't all women take it IDB?

What page?

The "CREATED" part is key. Not everyone is equal, but we were all created that way.

Im not getting into the torturing argument, just trying to answer the question about the beliefs of the FF's based off of their words.

 

[jlong]

The last post on the 13th page. I may agree that we are created equal, but that is as far as it goes. Everyone is by no means equal.

I argue that with myself sometimes though, I think some people were born ODB.

 

[mcinfantry]

What page?

The "CREATED" part is key. Not everyone is equal, but we were all created that way.

Im not getting into the torturing argument, just trying to answer the question about the beliefs of the FF's based off of their words.

so they said " all men are created equal, unfortunately, a vagina, or the tint of their skin makes them inferior, to my white male land owning ass"

where was that at?

 

[jlong]

They couldn't get together on that part, and didn't feel like dueling, so they left it out.

 

[Manimal]

I would say the part "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL" pretty much sums it up guys.

I think that they did mean what they said, but not that citizens should be on par with non citizens of the nation. I don't know where they implied that.

 

[Takuan]

Well, it seems stirring the pot a bit can actually lead to something interesting around here.

Despite being a "retard," I'll offer the following:

While Burr and Hamilton were active throughout the Revolutionary War era, neither really came to prominence politically until well after the establishment of the Republic. Of the two, Hamilton would certainly have the greater claim to being a Founding Father, since he actually was a delegate from New York to the Constitutional Convention. But after proposing a centralized Federal government structured similarly to Britain's, and being soundly rebuffed by the other delegates, he sort of picked up his marbles, stormed out in a huff (or minute and a huff), and went home to practice law. Thus, he wasn't there for most of the deliberations. He did return to sign the document, though. I don't believe Aaron Burr had any part in those proceedings.

I guess I'd regard Hamilton as a Founding Son, and Burr a Founding Cousin, but perhaps I'm splitting hairs. What can I say... I was an art student, for heaven's sake!

As for the other statement I've been called upon to defend, I suspect my answer will likely not satisfy (though, given that I'm a "retard," maybe one or two of you will cut me a little slack). Anyway, here goes:

When the Founding Fathers (along with Founding Sons, Cousins, Second Cousins, not to mention Founding Hangers On) determined the time had come to establish an independent nation, they first drafted the DoI... this was the instrument of political separation from Britain, but it did not establish the basis for law. The Constitution, drafted much later, did become (and still is) the basis for our law. What they did was truly revolutionary, and largely unprecedented. Far from the European status quo, they set out to create a nation governed by the rule of law, and not by the arbitrary whims of yet another "divinely-appointed" king or prince. My surmise is that they knew (or at least had some sense) that they were setting an example for the world to follow (as many countries have, though the French Revolution didn't exactly turn out so well).

For those of us living in the present day, I believe it's up to us to CONTINUE setting an example, so when we ignore our own Constitutional principles when dealing or treating with non citizens, we WEAKEN the very principles we claim to be defending. That, in turn, tends to pull the "moral high ground" out from under us like so much cheap carpet, and our status in the world is diminished. I, for one, would rather stand by our principles than sink to the ignominy of those who so despise liberty and freedom of conscience, thank you very much.

And that's all I have to say about that.

 

[Manimal]

But you don't think that the founders would want the non-citizens to become citizens, thus truly supporting the ideology, philosophy, and the nation itself?