TexasCHLforum.com

Oldgringo wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

Abraham wrote:Semantics or common sense - which one will/should prevail?

The liberal argument regarding American history generally paints patriots as terrorists.

Conservatives see it oppositely.

Simple.

However, they are not two opposing opinions. One is right. The other is wrong. In a liberal's world, there is no right or wrong, which is why what is right is so often wrong in their eyes. And if you understand that, you just might be a liberal.

Unless you base your philosophy on the theory that every human possesses certain rights, regardless of the government under which he labors or the people among whom he lives, your philosophy is "moored" in jelly and will shift with every other man's opinion.

I take it that your mind is pretty much made up?

My mind is unsullied by the pusillanimous philosophizing of progressives.

Abraham wrote:Semantics or common sense - which one will/should prevail?

The liberal argument regarding American history generally paints patriots as terrorists.

Conservatives see it oppositely.

Simple.

However, they are not two opposing opinions. One is right. The other is wrong. In a liberal's world, there is no right or wrong, which is why what is right is so often wrong in their eyes. And if you understand that, you just might be a liberal.

Unless you base your philosophy on the theory that every human possesses certain rights, regardless of the government under which he labors or the people among whom he lives, your philosophy is "moored" in jelly and will shift with every other man's opinion.

sjfcontrol wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

AndyC wrote:

baldeagle wrote:No other nation on earth was founded by free men seeking to form a government that honored the rights of every individual regardless of their background, their station in life or their political persuasion.

France.

Yes, France comes close. But their legal system takes them down a notch. Even though their bill of rights says you are innocent until proven guilty, their legal system does just the opposite. They also don't have a bill of rights that protects speech and religion and the ownership of guns. For example, the freedom of speech is subject to such abuses as are defined by law. That's no freedom at all. Freedoms cannot be circumscribed by laws. Even if the people allow the legislature to pass such laws, they are null and void, and a free citizen is not required to obey them. Only by force can the state enforce the loss of rights. That is what makes the American system stand apart from the rest. All other systems subjugate the rights of the citizens to the law.

You mean like free speech zones?

The American system didn't do that. An out of control government aided by a citizenry asleep at the switch did that. If the American system was functioning as designed (and it hasn't for almost 200 years), free speech zones would not exist. Nor would a lot of the other restrictions placed upon free men.

AndyC wrote:

baldeagle wrote:No other nation on earth was founded by free men seeking to form a government that honored the rights of every individual regardless of their background, their station in life or their political persuasion.

France.

Yes, France comes close. But their legal system takes them down a notch. Even though their bill of rights says you are innocent until proven guilty, their legal system does just the opposite. They also don't have a bill of rights that protects speech and religion and the ownership of guns. For example, the freedom of speech is subject to such abuses as are defined by law. That's no freedom at all. Freedoms cannot be circumscribed by laws. Even if the people allow the legislature to pass such laws, they are null and void, and a free citizen is not required to obey them. Only by force can the state enforce the loss of rights. That is what makes the American system stand apart from the rest. All other systems subjugate the rights of the citizens to the law.

Oldgringo wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:@ Baldeagle: "...no other founding fathers but ours". Really? Who started all of the other countries and religions of the world, eh?

It would help if you could actually name one.

Look here for a few.

I don't think either Jesus or Mohammed are on the above list but they would certainly qualify as founding fathers, don't you think?

Neither Jesus nor Mohammed ever founded a free nation, and no, I don't think anyone on that list qualifies.

Oldgringo wrote:@ Baldeagle: "...no other founding fathers but ours". Really? Who started all of the other countries and religions of the world, eh?

It would help if you could actually name one.

fickman wrote:Well, I've always heard that the difference between a revolt / rebellion and a revolution is who wins. It's probably the same distinction between Founding Fathers (of any independent nation) and traitors (to the former ruler).

You do realize that there are no other founding fathers but ours? No other nation on earth was founded by free men seeking to form a government that honored the rights of every individual regardless of their background, their station in life or their political persuasion.

Many Americans are ignorant of this fact. Pick a nation, any nation. All were founded by men who took control of an existing state and ruled over the people according to the dictates of their consciences (or lack of same) rather than the will of the governed. The one that comes the closest is France, and their justice system is based on the principle that you are guilty unless proven innocent.

America is not perfect. Far from it. But it's so far above the rest of the world's nations that there is no comparison. Most comparisons that are made are superficial at best and downright false at worst. It's a shame of great magnitude that many Americans don't realize this and honor it with their lives and fortunes.

When you swim in the moral cesspool of liberalism, this is what you get. An act that involved dumping tea bales in the bay to protest taxation without representation and didn't harm a single human being becomes the moral equivalent of flying jets into buildings to murder thousands of people and beheading living individuals because they disagree with you.

If you buy into that, you're part of the problem, not part of the solution.