Skip to comments.
Obama: Government can constrain the exercise of rights. WTF?
Posted on 04/17/2008 6:33:59 AM PDT by Bobarian
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-55 next last
I think this chilling quote by ObeyMe merits further discussion.
Let's plug some different variables into this equation and see if it adds up:
"Just because you have an individual right [to bear arms] does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right."
"Just because you have an individual right [to free speech] does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right."
"Just because you have an individual right [not to be searched unreasonably] does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right."
"Just because you have an individual right [to freely exercise religion] does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right."
"Just because you have an individual right [to an abortion] does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right."
Does anyone else find this disturbing, or are my panties in a wad over nothing?
1
posted on
04/17/2008 6:33:59 AM PDT
by
Bobarian
To: Bobarian
Does anyone else find this disturbing, or are my panties in a wad over nothing? Yeah... on the one hand, it is disturbing, even sickening what the constitution has come to mean. On the other hand, isn't this just the status quo - aka business as usual? I don't think anyone associates Hillary with liberty, and McCain has demonstrated that "Congress shall make no law restricting free speech" doesn't include his campaign finance reform.
2
posted on
04/17/2008 6:38:23 AM PDT
by
underground
(Viva la Socialisme Wall Street)
To: Bobarian
Opps, that is awkward isn’t it:
“Just because you have an individual right [to an abortion] does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right.”
3
posted on
04/17/2008 6:38:42 AM PDT
by
DManA
To: Bobarian
He cut it too short....He should have added much more info defining "constraint" such as registration, age, felons...
But he does that with every topic...It's his FORM of oratory....and non-commitment.
4
posted on
04/17/2008 6:38:45 AM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
To: Bobarian
Keep it up B. Hussein. your doing a bang up job, and real Americans appreciate your candor.
5
posted on
04/17/2008 6:38:59 AM PDT
by
Vaquero
(" an armed society is a polite society" Heinlein "MOLON LABE!" Leonidas of Sparta)
To: Bobarian
I am the person I have been waiting for...and quite frankly, that the constitution has been waiting for. Take it to the bank.
I know things that all you bitter rural, religious, gun-toting folks don't know...
THE TRUTH ABOUT BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY
6
posted on
04/17/2008 6:39:06 AM PDT
by
Jeff Head
(Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
To: Bobarian
He's only voicing what he's been taught.
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so." R.Reagan
7
posted on
04/17/2008 6:39:13 AM PDT
by
JPJones
(Cry havoc and let loose the Freepers!)
To: Bobarian
Disturbing is not the word. Obama’s words are the words of a tyrant. He is a patient wolf.
8
posted on
04/17/2008 6:42:31 AM PDT
by
AD from SpringBay
(We deserve the government we allow.)
To: Bobarian
And yet there are those that say JM and BHO - no difference.
9
posted on
04/17/2008 6:44:10 AM PDT
by
svcw
(I reject your reality and substitute my own.)
To: Bobarian
"I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms."This is why an ignorant moron like Obama will lose. He is essentially denying that all rights come from our Creator. What a stupid candidate.
To: Bobarian
Let us hope that by “constrain” he really meant “regulate”. However, the regulation of a right that shall not be infringed, is a slippery, and one-way, slope to prohibition, as ever-more stringent laws defining who is and who is not “debilitated” from exercising their Second Amendment right should tell us.
Indeed, it appears that Senator Schumer (D NY) has developed this line of thinking into an art form where he can say he “supports” the Second Amendment, while filing bills that cut away and cut away who can enjoy that right and where he can enjoy it.
Since liberalism, at its core is where a person lies to himself, we can expect the will lie to everyone else too. Anyone who has listened to the oral arguments in DC v Heller will hear the attorney for the District of Columbia tell the US Supreme Court that their total ban on handguns in the District alway included a self defense exemption!
The positions that both Obama and Clinton have elaborated in public about the Second Amendment is just like that bold lie: after I ban all guns, you can still hunt and use yours to protect your family. Who you gonna believe, what I'm telling you now, or the law that I told the gun-grabbers I want to sign?
To: Sacajaweau
I did not watch the debate but I agree with your statement - he cut it too short. But then again, it is the fault of the moderators not to press him on anything. The statement standing by itself and read broadly can find people agreeing on a majority of the statement. Would you want a truly insane person to legally have a firearm? Considering this day and age, I would recommend a class or classes of firearm safety courses. You could even CLEP it if you want too. There are people out there who can better teach the instructors of gun safety courses while there are others who would shoot themselves in the foot if given the chance.
But the main point is you are correct - these leftists never explain their initial statements and nobody presses them on it. And they never go to forums where people would press them on it.
12
posted on
04/17/2008 6:49:15 AM PDT
by
7thson
(I've got a seat at the big conference table! I'm gonna paint my logo on it!)
To: RabidBartender
Such a simple truth. Such profound consequences when we forget that.
13
posted on
04/17/2008 6:54:34 AM PDT
by
DManA
To: 7thson
I took the mandatory NYS Hunting Safety class in 1962 to get my deer license. I got several bulls eyes on the test and I pasted it on the refrigerator...just like a kid.
14
posted on
04/17/2008 6:54:44 AM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
To: DManA
“Just because you have an individual right [to an abortion] “
you do?
15
posted on
04/17/2008 6:55:55 AM PDT
by
MrB
(You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
To: RabidBartender
The left and their willing dupes, “conservative” atheists,
deny the existance of a Creator in order to deny that that’s where our rights originate.
Since the rights are conferred by man, or a construct of man, they can also be revoked in the same manner.
16
posted on
04/17/2008 6:57:31 AM PDT
by
MrB
(You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
To: theBuckwheat
I winced at his use of the word "constrain" in regard to the Constitution and specifically the Second Amendment. From Oxford University Press: con·strain / kənˈstrān/ v. [tr.] (often be constrained) severely restrict the scope, extent, or activity of: No thanks, Barry.
17
posted on
04/17/2008 6:57:37 AM PDT
by
Be_Politically_Erect
(Conservative from birth...Republican no more.)
To: Bobarian
“...just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right...”
THIS from a candidate whose party opposes the Patriot Act!!!
18
posted on
04/17/2008 6:59:37 AM PDT
by
SMARTY
('At some point you get tired of swatting flies, and you have to go for the manure heap' Gen. LeMay)
To: Bobarian
I think the people who wrote the Constitution believed that the rights conferred restrained the government.
Of course, people of Obama’s persuasion think the Constitution is a silly old document written by slaveholders.
19
posted on
04/17/2008 6:59:45 AM PDT
by
popdonnelly
(Unapologetically European)
To: MrB
Maybe I should have italicized does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right."
20
posted on
04/17/2008 6:59:52 AM PDT
by
DManA
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-55 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson