Re: Rights and Solemn Oaths -- CTHS Class of 1961 Reunion

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:54:40 04/09/17 Sun
Author: Denny (Whalen)
Subject: Re: Rights and Solemn Oaths
In reply to: Bonnie Barry 's message, "Re: Rights and Solemn Oaths" on 23:13:15 04/04/17 Tue

>Pat,
>I don’t remember knowing you in high school and I
>don’t recall your making comments on this forum in
>the recent past. I know nothing about you yet I was
>surprised when I read your post. In my view it is not
>Denny’s message that needs calling out, but yours.
>
>I’m glad that you did not experience any devisity &
>acrimony in school, but please understand that it
>existed for many others. You could even be criticized
>for having friends of the wrong color or social class.
>Anyone who witnessed the screaming fights in the
>girl’s locker room remembers it was not all
>sweetness and light.
>
>Ron Mack sometimes preached and crossed the line into
>thinly veiled misogyny referring to Kathleen’s
>“delicate nature”, and “hysteria” while you
>mention that “…discourse seems to upset the few
>who use it.” Kathleen is fully able to defend
>herself but there is no surer way to piss off women
>who have spent their whole lives fighting for equality.
>
>I read Ron Mack’s comments from a place of
>experience with him as a jokester who likes to stir
>the pot. I find him entertaining but do question
>whether he is interested in true discourse. And it
>would seem neither are you. Expounding on one’s
>beliefs as if they are absolute truth, trying to
>convince others that you are right and they are wrong
>is sometimes called a zero-sum-game or an argument
>with a pig. That’s not what I consider discourse.
>
>I think it is possible to state your point of view
>without a motive to win the argument. That is what
>Denny does. He is is not trying to convince anyone
>that he is right. There is no reason that we can’t
>allow others to be right also.
>
>Denny began by saying, "I'm dismayed that so many
>Americans cannot distinguish between rights and
>privileges…” Well isn’t that exactly the
>problem. Everyone’s list is different. There was a
>time when the work of government was to reach a
>balanced definition that a majority could live with.
>
>I do enjoy “...hearing about one's vacation…”
>and will grieve over a classmate's obituary, so I will
>continue to stop by here periodically, I would
>appreciate not being expected to argue with a pig.

Pat, I can't see any difference in what you commented to what I also see and feel. I won't name names and point fingers as I see both sides of both aisles in both the House and the Senate. If I were to be critical, I see more problems in the Senate than the House, mainly due to the great "powers" of the Senate. Fewer people representing the same number of constituents naturally makes their voice louder.

If people would read the various immigration acts, including the last major modification in 1990, they would understand the law better. Forget the memes on facebook...they have an agenda and are seldom 100% factual. I have come to think of the illegals as Illegal Entrants. Immigrants more accurately describes those persons entering the / a country in the proscribed manner, not slipping across a border illegally.

The US has gradually increased he number of immigrants to be accepted annually to about a quarter million a year now. Some of our problems stem from our legislative representatives demanding more "specificial" visas, then the government losses them..Effectively raising the numbers admitted, legally beyond the limits set. These lost visa holders stay beyond the period of their visas and become illegals, as surely as if they had slipped across the border without a visa or part of the annual quotas.

If more citizens knew the procedures, the laws, and the damage disregarding either causes, we would be calling out ICE, FBI, Senate, House, courts and the administration...forcing them to honor their oaths, obey the law, and work for the greater good. It just seems to me that only the common humanity that comprises our citizen rolls can adequately and righteously see what constitutes the greater good. Certainly not the government. The apathy and ignorance of voters is at the root of the problems we face.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]