I guess this ends the gun debate once and for allFollow

I'm curious (because I don't read gbaji or varus) to know who has suggested the positions above.

I'm a conservative (bordering on the libertarian) and I can safely say that all three of those positions are laughable.

Gbaji on the first two. The third is a bad paraphrase of something Totem said, I think.

You think a lot of non-humans do this, do ya?

I assume the "living breathing document" bit was based on Varus's last dozen posts.

"Marriage is all about producing children." - Gbaji
"Prom is to act out traditional marriage." - Gbaji
"The Constitution is not a living and breathing document." - Varus

And slow poster of the day goes to me.

Edited, Mar 31st 2010 10:59am by Belkira

I think Gbaji was supporting the third, too. Is that the thread where he claimed 9/11 wasn't an act of terrorism?

Moebe,



Sorry the bill of rights weren't meant to be changed.

Locked,

So the bill of rights are arbitrary and meaningless? Glad to hear a liberal finally admit how they really feel.

I said nothing like that. If you feel that way, glad to see you're a liberal?

I was pointing out the obvious, that the original Constitution has changed thanks to things called "Amendments," the first ten of which are known as the Bill of Rights.

Yup. Ridiculous oversimplification.

I said that the attack on the Pentagon was not a terrorist attack. I said that the WTC was a terrorist attack, and that the hijacking of the planes (as well as killing those on board via crashing them into their targets that day) was also an act of terrorism.

How does one go from that to "Gbaji claims that 9/11 wasn't an act of terrorism"? Cause you know, if we count each hijacking as one, and each plane that struck a building as another, we've got 7 total acts (assuming we don't count "crashing into a field" as either), 6 of which I identify as terrorist acts, and one of which I don't. Yeah. I guess we can just simplify that one in seven with the entire label "9/11". Lol...

I didn't post those generalizations. I was merely trying to answer Moe's question about who supported those positions.

Oh, and for the record. I've noticed a trend on either side to cry that we're no longer on topic in the vain hope that they can divert attention to the fact that they can't argue whatever topic the thread has evolved into.

Edited, Mar 31st 2010 5:38pm by Belkira

In my head I pronounce his name to rhyme with stodgy.

No. People make fun of me because that is how they have been taught to deal with conservative arguments. Make fun of the deliverer so that you don't have to actually debate the issue on those pesky things like facts...

Do it often and loudly enough, and you get to just laugh whenever he points out that you are doing this and the peanut gallery will all think that's funny as well. You guys will all laugh yourselves into slavery.