Judge Upholds Ban on NDAA Detentions

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
reply to post by QQXXw

 

exactly wich part is outdated?

the part that garantees your right to a trail?

the part that garantees your right to bear arms?

the part that is supposed to limit the federal governments power?

the part that protects freedom of speach?

the part that prohibits excessive fines and the likes?

which part is medieval and obsolete?

enlighten me

silly you

I also agree with QQXXw that our constitution is outdated…

Not because I think it should be. Not because I want it to be.

I say this as an observation of what I believe some in our government think it should be. It is true; the constitution has been trampled on. How many examples are there? Arizona SB 1070, NDAA 2012, excessive fines and taxes……etc… list goes on and on. I believe it’s a bi-partisan effort. Whether all politicians are knowingly complicit or not, it doesn't matter. The effect is still the same.

reply to post by MuonSpin


So because the US government passes laws that are unconstitutional it means the constitution is outdated?

I'll ask you the same question is asked QQXXw

Exactly which part is outdated?

The government passes laws that trample the constitution, does that mean it's outdated?

Imho it shows that it is more relevant than ever.

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
reply to post by MuonSpin

 

So because the US government passes laws that are unconstitutional it means the constitution is outdated?

I'll ask you the same question is asked QQXXw

Exactly which part is outdated?

The government passes laws that trample the constitution, does that mean it's outdated?

Imho it shows that it is more relevant than ever.

edit on 10-6-2012 by kn0wh0w because: (no reason given)

I do not think it's outdated in the sense that its irrelevant.. I meant many in our government clearly think it's outdated. This is evident by the many laws which show complete disregard for the constitution. This proves what you say is true. "It's more relevant than ever".

I wanted to make sure you understood what I'm saying here. It's important for me to make sure my words are not misunderstood. Especially about issues so important.

My argument was less about the relevance of the consitution to the people and more to point out how many in our government clearly see it as "dog poop on the shoe". In the people's eyes, as you say, it's more relevant than ever. And clearly, in many politican's eyes, it's stinky and annoying obstacle.