Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 151 to 164 of 164

Thread: The U.S. Constitution: Pro-Freedom?

  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    "a gross generalization"? What I said was a pretty $#@!ing accurate generalization, considering that specific performance is almost never applied, precisely because it is such an extreme measure. The fact that it so rarely is used and only with so many restrictions only serves to enhance my point. One of those restrictions, is it shouldn't be used for personal service!! (because that would be $#@!in' slavery)
    Except you didn't limit your claim to personal service contracts. You even acknowledged that one can be forced to convey real property via specific performance (presumably without becoming a slave). Nice try, but no cigar.

    And, BTW, how in the world is a State that has joined a union analogous to someone who has promised to render personal services? And how can a State possibly complain that it's a slave if it's forced to abide by the Constitution?
    Last edited by Sonny Tufts; 09-21-2022 at 03:31 PM.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    Except you didn't limit your claim to personal service contracts. You even acknowledged that one can be forced to convey real property via specific performance (presumably without becoming a slave). Nice try, but no cigar.
    Conveying property is not slavery and I never said it was. Conveying property, is just the primary context of how specific performance is applied. So, right back at you.. nice try.. no cigar.

    And, BTW, how in the world is a State that has joined a union analogous to someone who has promised to render personal services? And how can a State possibly complain that it's a slave if it's forced to abide by the Constitution?
    If you don't think it's a personal service contract, the contract is still not eligible for specific performance, based on any number of common law standards. Have your pick, almost every one of these restrictions would apply:

    - Specific performance would cause severe hardship to the defendant.
    - The contract was unconscionable.
    - Common Law damages are readily available or the detriment suffered by the claimant is easy to substitute, then damages are adequate.[1][2]
    - The claimant has misbehaved (unclean hands).
    - Specific performance is impossible.
    - Performance consists of a personal service [3]
    - The contract is too vague to be enforced.
    - The contract was terminable at will (meaning either party can renege without notice).
    - Note that consumer protection laws may disallow terms that allow a company to terminate a consumer contract at will (e.g. Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999[4])
    - The contract required constant supervision.[5]
    - Mutuality was lacking in the initial agreement of the contract.
    - The contract was made for no consideration.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    Except you didn't limit your claim to personal service contracts. You even acknowledged that one can be forced to convey real property via specific performance (presumably without becoming a slave). Nice try, but no cigar.

    And, BTW, how in the world is a State that has joined a union analogous to someone who has promised to render personal services? And how can a State possibly complain that it's a slave if it's forced to abide by the Constitution?
    Why should I sit by and let you pick your battles?

    How is a contract that can never be completed, satisfied and laid to rest except by death not slavery?

    And since you want to ignore the question, I'll up the ante. How can a contract be agreed to by a newborn, even if you think it's for a necessary? How can a newborn consent by any sane legal standard?

    Do you dare answer me?
    Last edited by acptulsa; 09-21-2022 at 04:10 PM.
    "Pity we didn't nominate Rand Paul--a man who actually has the Alpha Cojones to put his life on the line, but unfortunately lacks the bad taste necessary to brag about them."-- acptulsa

  6. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by pcosmar View Post
    If that man ever had his way ,,his utopia would be Owned by a Warlord in 2 years.

    as soon as you organize defense you have created Government.
    I've had a few direct tete-a-tetes with him on other platforms and have to say that he's a great big dick much of the time. You can't get a word in edgewise with him and if you disagree on the least point, he's on you like a lefty. He doesn't even ask for clarification on points of meaning. He just assumes what you mean, decides you're feces, and goes off. It's a shame because some of his ideas are sound, but he seems to think he's the only one with worthy thoughts. I just ignore him now, mainly because he has nothing new to say and I sure as the devil would not vote for him for any office.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    "Government" represents not an entity in sé, but a mob of fellow humans with no more authority to act as bosses, than do you.

    We get what we tolerate and we deserve what we get precisely because we tolerate it.

    Our acceptance of "tolerance" is prima facie proof of just how degraded we are as a species. Qualified tolerance, yes. Blind tolerance as we now so fully enjoy, no.

    Weakmen are the rule, Freemen the exception.

  7. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    I've had a few direct tete-a-tetes with him on other platforms and have to say that he's a great big dick much of the time. You can't get a word in edgewise with him and if you disagree on the least point, he's on you like a lefty. He doesn't even ask for clarification on points of meaning. He just assumes what you mean, decides you're feces, and goes off. It's a shame because some of his ideas are sound, but he seems to think he's the only one with worthy thoughts. I just ignore him now, mainly because he has nothing new to say
    Yet people love Alpha Trump

    and I sure as the devil would not vote for him for any office.
    People like that/them/us [politically correct term] don't seek office, so no skin off anybody's back.

    It is a lot more difficult to pull people up, than it is to pull people down. When one stands on principle and the truth, there is no reason to debate it. When you do debate it, look what happens with the 2ndA --> "sensible" and "red-flag" gun laws.

    Too bad politicians don't stand on principle and truth. But then, nobody would want to vote for them. Right, @osan? lol
    Last edited by PAF; 09-21-2022 at 05:14 PM.
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    An Agorist Primer

  8. #156
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    I've had a few direct tete-a-tetes with him on other platforms and have to say that he's a great big dick much of the time. You can't get a word in edgewise with him and if you disagree on the least point, he's on you like a lefty. He doesn't even ask for clarification on points of meaning. He just assumes what you mean, decides you're feces, and goes off. It's a shame because some of his ideas are sound, but he seems to think he's the only one with worthy thoughts. I just ignore him now, mainly because he has nothing new to say and I sure as the devil would not vote for him for any office.
    And I have been described as an anarchist,,for my views..
    I accept Government,,try to influence it.. I don't pretend it doesn't exist.

    Much like I accept Hurricanes and Sharks.
    Last edited by pcosmar; 09-21-2022 at 07:29 PM.
    Liberty is lost through complacency and a subservient mindset. When we accept or even welcome automobile checkpoints, random searches, mandatory identification cards, and paramilitary police in our streets, we have lost a vital part of our American heritage. America was born of protest, revolution, and mistrust of government. Subservient societies neither maintain nor deserve freedom for long.
    Ron Paul 2004

    Registered Ron Paul supporter # 2202
    It's all about Freedom

  9. #157
    A perpetual union is not by defintion, as understood then or now, necessarily a permanent union.

    We should never forget that this country is illegitimate. It is thoroughly illegitimate.
    "For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy ... Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed." - J.F.K.

  10. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowball View Post
    A perpetual union is not by defintion, as understood then or now, necessarily a permanent union.

    We should never forget that this country is illegitimate. It is thoroughly illegitimate.
    +rep on both counts
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his

  11. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by PAF View Post
    Yet people love Alpha Trump
    As I have oft quipped, the meaner is a beast and nothing more. Regardless the true source of the document, the Protocols of Zion nonetheless makes this point quite well when it says that those who refuse to use their brains are no different from those who have none.

    The elite have worked tirelessly to cultivate the inner idiot in as many as possible. As we see, they have done their work well. Given this, and given the fact that almost no matter how dim the individual, people are still able to keenly tell when the general environment is not in good shape. And so who can claim reasonable surprise when those Americans would glom on to a man who so adroitly read the room and gave clear and concrete steps, moving forward?
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    "Government" represents not an entity in sé, but a mob of fellow humans with no more authority to act as bosses, than do you.

    We get what we tolerate and we deserve what we get precisely because we tolerate it.

    Our acceptance of "tolerance" is prima facie proof of just how degraded we are as a species. Qualified tolerance, yes. Blind tolerance as we now so fully enjoy, no.

    Weakmen are the rule, Freemen the exception.

  12. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    And so who can claim reasonable surprise when those Americans would glom on to a man who so adroitly read the room and gave clear and concrete steps, moving forward?
    Clear, concrete steps. You must be joking. He promised everything, even mutually contradictory things, with never a word to how any of it could be accomplished. What medications were you on in 2016?

    That's not what did it. In the early primaries, he was getting six or seven percent.

    What did it is, there were seventeen bodies in the race. Seven percent was therefore enough for Fox to pronounce him the front-runner, and Republicans will nominate a ham sandwich if Fox pronounces it the front-runner.
    Last edited by acptulsa; 09-23-2022 at 02:37 PM.
    "Pity we didn't nominate Rand Paul--a man who actually has the Alpha Cojones to put his life on the line, but unfortunately lacks the bad taste necessary to brag about them."-- acptulsa



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #161
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    Clear, concrete steps. You must be joking. He promised everything, even mutually contradictory things, with never a word to how any of it could be accomplished. What medications were you on in 2016?
    You seem to have missed the point. For the mean man, he was lighting the way. We were speaking of the lowatt intellects that comprise the American mean. For them, Trump provided what was needed. It was largely smoke and mirrors, as if this should surprise anyone.
    Last edited by osan; 09-23-2022 at 03:26 PM.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    "Government" represents not an entity in sé, but a mob of fellow humans with no more authority to act as bosses, than do you.

    We get what we tolerate and we deserve what we get precisely because we tolerate it.

    Our acceptance of "tolerance" is prima facie proof of just how degraded we are as a species. Qualified tolerance, yes. Blind tolerance as we now so fully enjoy, no.

    Weakmen are the rule, Freemen the exception.

  15. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    +rep on both counts
    Possibly the most concise and accurate defence of secession as a fully American right, steeped in historical affirmation, that I've ever heard:



    Audio download page:
    https://www.thebadroman.com/show-notes/episode-24
    "For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy ... Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed." - J.F.K.

  16. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    How is a contract that can never be completed, satisfied and laid to rest except by death not slavery?
    Just as a contract can be dissolved if all parties thereto consent, the Union could be dissolved if all of its members agreed. It would probably be possible even if less than 100% consented.

    But if only one State wants to leave, you're going to have a problem. From a purely legal standpoint (assuming secession can be analyzed in legal terms) the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no right to secede. From a de facto perspective it's hard to see how it would ever be allowed, either by the other States or by the citizens of the secession wannabe State.

    Quote Originally Posted by acptulsa View Post
    And since you want to ignore the question, I'll up the ante. How can a contract be agreed to by a newborn, even if you think it's for a necessary? How can a newborn consent by any sane legal standard?
    Newborns don't enter into contracts. Older minors sometimes do, and they have the right to disaffirm the contract under certain conditions. A contract for necessaries could be viewed as enforceable under a quantum meruit theory without regard to actual consent.

    Not sure what all that has to do with secession, though.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  17. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    But if only one State wants to leave, you're going to have a problem. From a purely legal standpoint (assuming secession can be analyzed in legal terms) the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no right to secede.
    If we're still running with the contract analogy, the Supreme Court's rulings would have no bearing on a member state's ability to terminate the contract relationship.

    From a contract perspective, the Supreme Court is basically the contract's designated arbitrator/mediator. It's an extremely common thing for contracts to have a designated arbitrator. But what those arbitrators can't do, is change the terms of the contract. Saying that the contract cannot be terminated, without the consent of X amount of parties involved, would be changing the terms of the contract. Imagine if you went into mediation over your phone bill, and the mediator said nope, you cannot terminate this contract because we decided that this contract requires the consent of both parties to terminate it? You would be furious, report the phone company to the BBB, and the phone company would get their ass handed to them in various legal penalties.

    If we were to however put the contract analogy on a shelf, and consider it from a human rights perspective, the Supreme Court's ruling that a state cannot secede on its own, violates the right to self determination.

    It is such an important right that the United Nations recognizes the right to self determination as a basic human right in Article 1 of the UN Charter.

    Nearly any rational person of solid ethics will claim to respect this basic human right, but it hasn't always been consistently upheld. The Catalans are for example being politically oppressed and forced to stay in a relationship they no longer desire. And this is extremely unethical.

    There is no justification for forcing people to stay in a relationship that is no longer consensual. To claim otherwise would be to confess oneself as a tyrant.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Crenshaw 2024!!!!

    My pronouns are he/him/his

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 43
    Last Post: 10-19-2011, 08:59 PM
  2. Freedom Watch 01/11/11 Assault On The Constitution
    By CaseyJones in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-11-2011, 09:01 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2010, 02:26 AM
  4. Constitution Worship Undermines the Cause For Freedom
    By powerofreason in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 169
    Last Post: 07-10-2009, 10:24 PM
  5. lobbyist group for the constitution and freedom!?!?!?!
    By mysticgeek in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-13-2008, 10:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •