Hplarrm Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Look, groups routinely pick and choose what parts of the Constitution they want to emphasize and then build whole ethos of thinking and alleged ways of life around their partial reading. For example, if the NRA truly based its thinking and actions on the words of the Constitution, a real adherence to the second amendment would start with making sure that we had a well-regulated militia. NRA seems to emphasize the later parts of the amendment without a focus on the fact that as best as I can judge we do not have the well-regulated militia in this country that all of the later clauses in the second amendment clearly are dependent upon existing before the later clauses are even relevant. Even the biggest proponents of close adherence to the words of the Constitution seem happy to ignore the words in the Constitution which they find inconvenient. Ultimately it is this adherence to convenience which tends to undermine the faith of normal folk in what I think is one of the greatest written documents in human history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Look, groups routinely pick and choose what parts of the Constitution they want to emphasize and then build whole ethos of thinking and alleged ways of life around their partial reading. For example, if the NRA truly based its thinking and actions on the words of the Constitution, a real adherence to the second amendment would start with making sure that we had a well-regulated militia. NRA seems to emphasize the later parts of the amendment without a focus on the fact that as best as I can judge we do not have the well-regulated militia in this country that all of the later clauses in the second amendment clearly are dependent upon existing before the later clauses are even relevant. Even the biggest proponents of close adherence to the words of the Constitution seem happy to ignore the words in the Constitution which they find inconvenient. Ultimately it is this adherence to convenience which tends to undermine the faith of normal folk in what I think is one of the greatest written documents in human history. Wow! You're going to poke that hornet's nest??? Good luck to you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 (edited) I'd suggest reading the whole post in future: He changed his own policy soon after the initial public outrage to 6 games for a 1st offense Why not give him 6 games after finally viewing the tapes? Now he's changed it to indefinite suspension for a 1st offense? And public outrage can make him change his PCP? What about all the lying? Look, I know you're defending him because you like him and his work suspending Bills players. But as some point, a reasonable person says he looks like a lying chump. And unless directed by the owners to do what he did, brought this all on himself. And thus he should face the consequences. I read the whole post. You claimed he burned the tapes and then claimed you didn't claim that. You said it wasn't just public pressure, then you said ok it was public pressure. As for the rest, I along with most others here have stated that he obviously is bowing to public pressure while ignoring his own new rules for domestic violence in giving Rice "indefinite" suspension, so...I've said the policy is a joke. I also said weeks ago that he likely saw the second tape before giving Rice 2 games--so he is likely lying. Therefore, I don't know what your beef is with my post other than pointing out a couple more flip-flops. Edited September 11, 2014 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark3 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Wow! You're going to poke that hornet's nest??? Good luck to you! Well someone just said that stating the preamble is very important (perhaps the most important) part of the constitution is stupid. I don't think that is getting topped today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Wow! You're going to poke that hornet's nest??? Good luck to you! Poking what hornets nest. The words are what the words are. If one believes in the 2nd amendment and one also insists on a literal reading of the words, the Constitution calls for regulation of militias. The words of the Constitution makes this an essential element to exist before stating Congress shall make no law. The words are clear that anyone who insists on adherence to the clear words of the Constitution is also endorsing a well-regulated militia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 No, Crayonz already came out and denied any affiliation. He reminds me of gatorboy. Similar style. FleaMoulds88? PdaDdy? MDP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Poking what hornets nest. The words are what the words are. If one believes in the 2nd amendment and one also insists on a literal reading of the words, the Constitution calls for regulation of militias. The words of the Constitution makes this an essential element to exist before stating Congress shall make no law. The words are clear that anyone who insists on adherence to the clear words of the Constitution is also endorsing a well-regulated militia. Honestly, I think it's a humorous change of subject on this thread. Carry on. (but, without me.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubs Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 No, there's usually one mob. Mob mentality is a real thing and historically a primary concern for keeping domestic order was subduing mobs. One of the primary reasons why we have criminal trials with set procedures and protections was to avoid mob justice. Because the mob is not rational. You can scoff at it all you want, but just because you agree with or are part of the mob doesn't make it any less real. Now it's tweets, emails, and blogs rather than pitchforks and torches, but it's still a group of irrational people calling for someone's head. And you not worrying about it doesn't change the fact that one day it could be you or someone you care about in those crosshairs. And yes, people have always had their words held against them, but the situation as it exists today where everything is public, narcissism is at an all time high and growing, and political correctness has become de facto law (and a strict one at that) where saying something mildly controversial off hand, in public or private, can bring a media firestorm down upon he who dares question convention, that's relatively new in America. Galileo would probably chuckle at western society and say we've come full circle. Rob, very well said. I truly wish most people had that kind of level-headed response to things. I couldn't agree with what you said anymore than I do and it's a relief to know there are still sane, grounded people out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Well someone just said that stating the preamble is very important (perhaps the most important) part of the constitution is stupid. I don't think that is getting topped today It was topped - decisively - by the idiot claiming the FIRST THREE WORDS of the preamble are the most important part of the document. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Ray Rice told Goodell he hit fiancee: http://espn.go.com/e...ne-had-hit-wife Ray Rice told NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on June 16 that he punched his then-fiancee in a casino elevator, four sources have told "Outside the Lines," an assertion that contradicts Goodell's statement this week that "when we met with Ray Rice and his representatives, it was ambiguous about what actually happened." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 What is this, that just dropped out of the sky? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 What is this, that just dropped out of the sky? and landed in Hell. Welcome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 @EyeOnNFL Former NFL security director says he always got surveillance tapes. http://www.cbssports...-tapes … pic.twitter.com/wE6x3j5qkJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Honestly, who gives a flying !@#$ who saw what tape when? What exactly are people upset about here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Honestly, who gives a flying !@#$ who saw what tape when? What exactly are people upset about here? Republicans are waging a war on women Republicans are racists The commish and NFL owners are white republicans Therefore the NFL is waging war on women and minorities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Honestly, who gives a flying !@#$ who saw what tape when? What exactly are people upset about here? Who cares? We're outraged! Burn the witch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Well all I have to say is this whole incident has brought a greater awareness to domestic violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Well all I have to say is this whole incident has brought a greater awareness to domestic violence. It has. Now that women beating POS Goodell will get his! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Honestly, who gives a flying !@#$ who saw what tape when? What exactly are people upset about here? Personally, I'm upset that the head of the NFL thought a two-game suspension for punching a woman in the face is acceptable. Remember, what we're learning is that Goodell saw the video and still handed Rice the two-game rip. Had the video not surfaced, Ray Rice would be playing in two weeks. I'm not cool with that. Should Goodell get canned for this? No, because he corrected himself. But if he gets caught lying, they'll moider him in the press to the extent that he'll have to step down to put the focus back on the product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 12, 2014 Share Posted September 12, 2014 Personally, I'm upset that the head of the NFL thought a two-game suspension for punching a woman in the face is acceptable. Remember, what we're learning is that Goodell saw the video and still handed Rice the two-game rip. Had the video not surfaced, Ray Rice would be playing in two weeks. I'm not cool with that. Should Goodell get canned for this? No, because he corrected himself. But if he gets caught lying, they'll moider him in the press to the extent that he'll have to step down to put the focus back on the product. Violence against women is pretty high on my sh-- list too, so it pisses me off that no one gives a !@#$ that Rice received no punishment from the criminal justice system and the lemming crowd instead is focused on crucifying his employer. Goodell has dug himself a nice hole, but he's a bad choice for a scapegoat in this whole mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts