| Users Online Now: 2,143 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 1,738,887 | |
| Pageviews Today: 2,405,742 | Threads Today: 594 | Posts Today: 11,102 |
| 06:39 PM | ||
| Users Online Now: 2,143 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 1,738,887 | |
| Pageviews Today: 2,405,742 | Threads Today: 594 | Posts Today: 11,102 |
| 06:39 PM | ||
Trying now to screw around with the Declaration of Independence? | |
Ms. Superduper (OP) User ID: 46155084  United States07/04/2014 04:48 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | So, according to the article that is written by some libtard fuck, they are alluding to the fact that a period can possibly change the entire spirit of the document. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 56351749 I can see what they are arguing - to summarize, they are saying because a period may not exist behind 'the pursuit of life liberty and happiness' it combines that with 'governments are instituted...' making the document state we need government to ensure life liberty happiness. But the fucking context of the document is about limited government and how we are endowed with inalienable rights from our creator. Even WITHOUT A PERIOD you can't misinterpret the statement. Another enlightened liberal cunt trying to change something and be a real trail blazer. it holds true that the "they" in question have always utilized the so called "letter of the law" to defeat the very purpose thereof... aka "devils in the details" in fact and in truth this Greater is He who is in me than he who is in the world. Whatever feels good to your soul, do that. |
| Anu, father of Enki User ID: 57058081 United States07/04/2014 06:59 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Or almost exactly? A scholar is now saying that the official transcript of the document produced by the National Archives and Records Administration contains a significant error — smack in the middle of the sentence beginning “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” no less. Quoting: Ms. Superduper [link to www.nytimes.com] Silly talking monkeys, does it matter. Its been suspended for years. [link to www.dailypaul.com] I ordered the destruction of mankind, why are you still here? |
| Nikola Tesla User ID: 55714405 United States07/04/2014 07:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation |  "One person with courage is a majority." - Thomas Jefferson "You’ve heard that we are what we eat. But we also are what we think". “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." -William F. Buckley Jr. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 55962524 United States07/04/2014 07:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Also, how can a few men draft legislation, and then declare it the law over a huge geographical area composed of millions of people? It also implies that one must consent to it by its wording. Consent cannot be implied....It is law. To consent one must sign or leave their mark. Also, a contract signed by ones parents does not apply to their children. I can go on and on. Why do you think our government behaves as if the Constitution doesn't apply anymore? Because it doesn't. You have more right under natural law anyway. Nobody has the balls to defend them. |
| thepatrioticgirl User ID: 58823810 United States07/04/2014 07:47 PM  Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | grammar rules. It really does. Quoting: beeches These sentences, forgive me, are entirely different. I was helping my Uncle Jack off a horse. I was helping my uncle j*** off a horse. I am sorry if anyone is offended! Tamer example : Women who can't drive should stay off the road. Women, who can't drive, should stay off the road. The first sentence is common sense - no one who drives should be on the road - the second is a blanket statement about women. NOT good! Wrong on both counts and I'm too tired to even explain it to you. Grab any high school "English" book and you'll see that grammar has nothing at all to do with how the above sentences are interpreted. Grammar is not an umbrella category and does not include capitalization (the only difference b/w the sentences in your first example) or the punctuation in the second (which actually shows NO difference between the two sentences in the second example). Someone who has "bad" grammar has trouble putting words together to create a complete sentence. It's all fun & games until the Dogman stands up Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "Holy Shit! What a ride!" In times of trouble, I ask myself, "What would Sarah Conner do?" |
| beeches User ID: 28167778 United States07/04/2014 09:59 PM  Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | grammar rules. It really does. Quoting: beeches These sentences, forgive me, are entirely different. I was helping my Uncle Jack off a horse. I was helping my uncle j*** off a horse. I am sorry if anyone is offended! Tamer example : Women who can't drive should stay off the road. Women, who can't drive, should stay off the road. The first sentence is common sense - no one who drives should be on the road - the second is a blanket statement about women. NOT good! Wrong on both counts and I'm too tired to even explain it to you. Grab any high school "English" book and you'll see that grammar has nothing at all to do with how the above sentences are interpreted. Grammar is not an umbrella category and does not include capitalization (the only difference b/w the sentences in your first example) or the punctuation in the second (which actually shows NO difference between the two sentences in the second example). Someone who has "bad" grammar has trouble putting words together to create a complete sentence. In written language, grammar includes punctuation. Wow. Go to sleep if you are so tired, see you in the morning... Liberalism is totalitarianism with a human face – Thomas Sowell |
