[The Resister]

@The Resister You need to be honest are You asking for revolution, if so for that You will find greater support among ultra left guerillas than any ultra right wing liberal, simply patriots will follow only party linea knowing that only from with in (like that at least holding some heavy weapons) is possible to be challenged the banc'corp elites, aside that even them is question how they will act knowing that in hours usA can be bankrupted by the deep swamp!

anyway have or not followers You need also honestly to quote ThomasJ "the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it's natural manure" what points to uprising, if so You need too say exactly as have freemasons when rushed for "liberation from vatican" with their motto "freedom or death" which "freemasonic slogan is enlightenment mood related to Lady Liberty, in romanticism it was used in American Revolution [1][1] there is some suggestions that is taken from poetic expression [1] but think that its origins are from antiquity "“Freedom or death” – those three words are famously inscribed in popular culture and associated with the historical figure of Spartacus" [1]" borrowed quote from historum [1]

and even You succeed, again that would mean extra amount of casualties, not just locally but globally, if we know that freemasons and zaonists if sense they are loosing ground will do everything in their power to stir ww3 so they would execute the long dreamed n'w'o ideal, so in the end again You will get some tyrant to rule over the unalienable rights except the masses, and thats why I am suggesting try reinvent the system from within altho for that one need to get devoted in thinking not raging, think already pointed if many focus and support introduction of True Open Society [7] in your case lawyers at least referendum can lead to local if not federal reintroduction of the unalienable natural rights ...

somehow this revolution scream mids these times always smells to me like deep state skim, even in case with the capitol storm thing was pushed likewise, altho one need Christian Patience so he would understand this and at least see the true moment for such momentum, but as recent history contest in every such event secrete service stooges were throwing people as pigeons to wolfs so it would be silenced any momentum build up in front before it gets enough power so when will burst will cover all system as citizen tsunami, I'll quote useful point by Collins Brothers shared on DTT "dont be naive" fighting evil with evil will not lead to freedom but new greater tyranny, dont forget we live in the beginning of the last times so focus on Spiritual Freedom and Salvation just like that You can reach the utmost help from above, but how if one wants to keep in life the freemasonic constitution, what to say think twice, who is father of revolution, where will lead such to, try debate with calm than angry mind, tho its Your Free Will but be careful through hate not to loose Grace and like that You and those who will follow You fell from the revolution cliff!

Do you know what is wrong with good old fashioned dishonesty? It's dishonest. When you accuse people of something, YOU should be honest. If I wanted to argue on behalf of revolution, I'd advocate for one. The people are not ready for a revolution. You live in a divided country where nobody really knows where in the name of good common sense they're going. The left wants to be regressive and institute policies that have failed - and they are known as "progressives." Going from Liberty to Slavery isn't progress. The political right, which used to be associated with constitutionalism, doesn't know squat about the Constitution. They were conned into taking up the liberals fight; the liberals abandoned it, realizing the right would help them.

Get this through your head. We do not live under a constitutional form of government. I support The Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man so that people will advocate for unalienable Rights. Unalienable Rights are those Rights that every man is born with at birth. By our courts own earliest rulings, unalienable Rights are above the reach of government. Evil forces told the people what they wanted to hear in the formation of our country and now you conflate unalienable Rights with the enforcement of a document that is a relic of a bygone era.

Your belief that fighting evil begets living under a worse form of evil is the most bizarre thing I've ever heard in my life. If you want to argue this from a Christian perspective, the founders and framers of this country had that very argument long before the ratification of the Declaration of Independence. I'd like to quote a few lines from a book as per the Fair Use Doctrine and let you rethink your argument. The name of the book is "The Light and the Glory" by Peter Marshall and David Manuel:

"When does tyranny become tyranny? Is there a time when it is not only morally correct but the will of God for one to resist legally constituted authority? When does the Lord's "anointed" lose his anointing? When did it become God's will for America to throw off the yoke of Britain? Was it God's will at all?

Of all the questions we faced, this was the one we dreaded the most. For a strong case could be made against America's ever coming out from the mother country's authority. If God did intend this land to be a new Israel, then each major step in the implementation of the plan would have to conform with His righteousness. A holy end, no matter how sublime, could never justify unholy means.

The more we debated this, the more mired down we became. So we prayed to be shown the way out of this mental swamp. And that same morning in Florida, in which we had been unable to discern the true nature of the Puritans' call, the Holy Spirit went on show us why America had to resist - why for them to do anything less would have been the greatest disobedience. This part of the revelation began with a Scripture coming to Peter's mind, which, was Gataltians 5 : 1 and which proved to be the key to all that followed:

For freedom, Christ has set us free; stand fast, therefore, and do not submit to a yoke of slavery."

I do not advocate for revolution. I demand my unalienable Rights. Society must be informed and educated relative to their Rights and if these powerful organizations initiate a revolution because we refuse to be ruled over by tyrants, then that is on them. But, just as in the case throughout history, when that stage is reached, they will not win. The people to whom you refer to are not gods. They are mere mortals. The founders and framers of our Constitution stood against the mightiest nation on the globe and went into a war with only a fraction of the people supporting Independence. And they won. I've studied all kinds of history and from the Israelites escaping the tyranny of the Pharaoh's rule to our own history, people naturally fight against tyranny - even though they may have participated in it initially. I will not bow down to your mortal gods. They are men that put their pants on the same way everybody else does. They are not invincible. I do not advocate revolution. Ironically, you seem to be threatening me with one if people support The Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man. Fear will not stop a people who reject the slavery and oppression you have come to accept.

[Odiseizam]

no I am not luring You to admit something nor fearmongering anyhow, just point that with Your rhetoric You are laying path for wanna-be revolutionary movement, now can others join sure they can and till wake up they could be all easily flushed down the drain, I am simply pointing what is the right way for introducing eventual change > an new eForum public and transparent where by lawyers (constitutionalists and others) this matter will be constantly debated after what You can push for further legal action ...

now is your cause justified, hm usA has such rigged and skewed system that simply You as citizens are hostages of the same and on mercy to its elites, otherwise it wouldnt happen third of the population to be on some hardship in the most wealthiest country in the world [1] aside the fact that not exit even decent way of solidarity for those that are homeless [2] so first of all as I said You need to focus on the misused the legal rights and then after run for effecting also the natural rights, but to do that You need to remove the corrupt bureaucracy and for that there is no other way but to push for wide transparency on all levels, again check the 7th footnotes in the next one [7] btw True Israelites didnt overthrow the pharaoh but run away from the tyrant, something similar happened with many us citizens in the past century migrating to Canada ...

https://www.youtu.be/5VbHAUf6Lgw

[Drlee]

Most of you reading this had grandparents that had children by the age of 14.

Garbage. Do you like to start all of your posts with an abject lie? Clearly your tactic is to simply make shit up. How about you source this nonsense. Let me make a fool of your from the start. In 1910, when my grandmother was 14, the average age at marriage, not to mention having children was 21.6 for women. In 1890 it was actually older. Having children out of wedlock was very rare when I was a youngster not to mention in my grandmothers time. And you should keep in mind Sport that I AM the age of the grandparents of most people posting here and when I was 14, sex with a 14 year old, just like today, would buy you 20 years in the slammer. Very few of my friends were even having sex at 14.

@The Resister This dr.lee is proving to want to troll me. Well, okay. Let's go into drlee's home for a few minutes. Did you know that the OVERWHELMING majority of the junk in his house (electronics, furniture, clothes, etc.) were made in racist countries and /or communist countries that employ slave labor? How many products do each of you buy that say "Made in China?" Over 98 percent of the people in China are Han Chinese. By drlee's insanity, how many of you are racists by not doing something about it... like say, not buying stuff that says "Made in China?" There are more Chinese in China than there are white people on the face of the earth. drlee's computer was probably made with parts made in China. So, maybe he's the racist here.

This is illogical and unhinged. Exactly what is it that you are proposing? Rationalizing racism because, as you alibied the actions of the founders, everyone is doing it? (Oh yea. It is also bordering on xenophobic.)

drlee cannot have a civil discussion without wallowing in the mud and calling me names. I would return the favor, but if you look closely, he is deflecting and projecting and it is a sign of weakness. He does not want anyone to consider The Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man because he fears that which he cannot understand. Such mental midgetry fails to impress anyone with an IQ higher than their shoe size, so think it over. I wonder how many times drlee filled the gas tank of his car with gasoline produced in Saudi Arabia. Women there didn't get the right to vote until 2011. Ask drlee to show you his many posts denouncing that.

I want people to consider your silly "Charter" and reject it as the garbage that it is just as I did. As for trade with China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia, I could not care less at this point. I am an American and believe it is time we fix our own wagon before we worry about others. We have just had a coup and I fear it is too late to stop the inevitable flow toward open fascism. Besides. The US virtually created modern Japan and had a large hand in China's move to capitalism. No doubt you have rejected all foreign made stuff and are posting by rubbing two sticks together.

The road to Freedom and Liberty is a journey, not a destination. No matter how hard we try, we won't be perfect, but that's no reason to settle for drlee's Hell on Earth utopia of socialism, despair, and inequalities.

I am a Christian, free market, balanced budget conservative Republican gun owner. Obviously you are mistaking me for someone else.

I am fully capable of expressing my own views.

All evidence to the contrary.

[late]

Garbage.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you nearly all the time.

But this thread strikes me as a dead letter.

Reminds me of a really old Maine joke. Downeast used to be known for miserable weather, and the postmen just about never stopped. After one particularly wretched storm, Bill was walking to the store. Halfway there he saw the postman's hat. Thinking he would give it back, he picked it up. When he did, there was the postman's head, just above the mud. 'Good morning', the postman said.

Good morning, said Bill, are you alright? The postman said he was ok, but he didn't think his horse was doing so good.

[Pants-of-dog]

If you're happy and you know it, clank your chains. I prefer to be the master of my own destiny. With just the Right to Life alone, the government has no legitimate reason to enslave you. I'm hoping to spend the rest of my life surrounded by people that reject the accepted notion that the government owns them. Have a great life.

This is a good example of the poor argument used by advocates of natural rights.

Instead of providing support for your claim using logic, you instead insist that you are morally better than me because I apparently love being a slave and you love freeeeeeeeeeeedooooooooom!

[Drlee]

@late I don't think I understand.

[late]

@late I don't think I understand.

My cursory look gave me the impression this was Right wing nonsense; and that it had nothing to do with anything real.

Thus, dead letter, buried in mud, and going nowhere.

You do know what a dead letter is?

[Drlee]

Yes. I get it now.

There used to be a "dead letter office" but I had not heard the term in years.

I totally agree with your characterization of this gentleman's nonsensical posts.

What is interesting though is that there appear to be a great many people in the US to whom this kind of lunacy so appeals that they would not think of fact checking it. There is no doubt in my mind that this guy thinks that marrying 14 year olds was common. Why he thinks this evades me as the actual statistics show that marriage under about 21 was not that common.

I think part of the problem is that very few Americans realize that colonial America operated under British law. And so, for example, a woman could not marry without parental consent younger than 18. As many if not most marriages were arranged this made young marriages less common. And women entering the country as indentured servants could not enter before 21 and were not free to marry until after 27 or so.

Not that this is important. It is some kind of dodge on his part. He immediately accused me of calling Jefferson a "pedophile". I did not do that. I simply stated some facts. Sally Hemmings was, in fact, Jefferson's property. She was, in fact, his wife's sister. She was, in fact, 14 years old when she was sent as a servant accompaning Jefferson's daughter to England. She was, under English law, free and under legal age when she arrived in England. Jefferson had sex with her and she had his children. When she returned to the US with him she was again a slave as were her children; Jefferson's own children. Jefferson enslaved and kept in slavery his own sons only freeing them many years later.

What are we to make of this? Well to the @The Resister point that the words of the founders are sacrosanct, it clearly falls to us to understand the nature of the people he wants us to revere. Frankly some of the founders were pretty enlightened and morally steadfast men. Jefferson, for all of his fame and his undeniable role in crafting the early constitution, was neither enlightened nor morally steadfast. Sally Hemmings is but one example, among many, of his morally indefensible behavior.

But does the fact that he was, as TheRegister wants us to believe, just a man of his times, excuse his owning, beating and raping his slaves? I say no. Register says yes. But wait! What did Jefferson say about it?

“There is nothing I would not sacrifice to a practicable plan of abolishing every vestige of this moral and political depravity.”
—Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, September 1814

“Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever…”
—Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1782

He knew it was wrong. He believed that God would punish him and others for it. He described his own behavior as a slave owner as "depravity".

No. Jefferson was one of our most important founding fathers. As the craftsman of a great political compromise he was unquestionably remarkable. But as an example of moral rectitude he was an abject failure. And his original document, the constitution, reflects this failure.

[The Resister]

This is a good example of the poor argument used by advocates of natural rights.

Instead of providing support for your claim using logic, you instead insist that you are morally better than me because I apparently love being a slave and you love freeeeeeeeeeeedooooooooom!

Nobody can force you to want to be the master of your own destiny. If you want someone else to pamper you and school you the rest of your life, that's your business. It's not an argument.

[late]

Yes. I get it now.

There used to be a "dead letter office" but I had not heard the term in years.

I totally agree with your characterization of this gentleman's nonsensical posts.

What is interesting though is that there appear to be a great many people in the US to whom this kind of lunacy so appeals that they would not think of fact checking it. There is no doubt in my mind that this guy thinks that marrying 14 year olds was common. Why he thinks this evades me as the actual statistics show that marriage under about 21 was not that common.

I think part of the problem is that very few Americans realize that colonial America operated under British law. And so, for example, a woman could not marry without parental consent younger than 18. As many if not most marriages were arranged this made young marriages less common. And women entering the country as indentured servants could not enter before 21 and were not free to marry until after 27 or so.

Not that this is important. It is some kind of dodge on his part. He immediately accused me of calling Jefferson a "pedophile". I did not do that. I simply stated some facts. Sally Hemmings was, in fact, Jefferson's property. She was, in fact, his wife's sister. She was, in fact, 14 years old when she was sent as a servant accompaning Jefferson's daughter to England. She was, under English law, free and under legal age when she arrived in England. Jefferson had sex with her and she had his children. When she returned to the US with him she was again a slave as were her children; Jefferson's own children. Jefferson enslaved and kept in slavery his own sons only freeing them many years later.

What are we to make of this? Well to the @The Resister point that the words of the founders are sacrosanct, it clearly falls to us to understand the nature of the people he wants us to revere. Frankly some of the founders were pretty enlightened and morally steadfast men. Jefferson, for all of his fame and his undeniable role in crafting the early constitution, was neither enlightened nor morally steadfast. Sally Hemmings is but one example, among many, of his morally indefensible behavior.

But does the fact that he was, as TheRegister wants us to believe, just a man of his times, excuse his owning, beating and raping his slaves? I say no. Register says yes. But wait! What did Jefferson say about it?





He knew it was wrong. He believed that God would punish him and others for it. He described his own behavior as a slave owner as "depravity".

No. Jefferson was one of our most important founding fathers. As the craftsman of a great political compromise he was unquestionably remarkable. But as an example of moral rectitude he was an abject failure. And his original document, the constitution, reflects this failure.

I was thinking of the second definition, still used by the DipCorp:

2.
a law or treaty that has not been repealed but is ineffectual or defunct in practice.

Parrots are birdbrains...

[The Resister]

Garbage. Do you like to start all of your posts with an abject lie? Clearly your tactic is to simply make shit up. How about you source this nonsense. Let me make a fool of your from the start. In 1910, when my grandmother was 14, the average age at marriage, not to mention having children was 21.6 for women. In 1890 it was actually older. Having children out of wedlock was very rare when I was a youngster not to mention in my grandmothers time. And you should keep in mind Sport that I AM the age of the grandparents of most people posting here and when I was 14, sex with a 14 year old, just like today, would buy you 20 years in the slammer. Very few of my friends were even having sex at 14.



This is illogical and unhinged. Exactly what is it that you are proposing? Rationalizing racism because, as you alibied the actions of the founders, everyone is doing it? (Oh yea. It is also bordering on xenophobic.)



I want people to consider your silly "Charter" and reject it as the garbage that it is just as I did. As for trade with China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia, I could not care less at this point. I am an American and believe it is time we fix our own wagon before we worry about others. We have just had a coup and I fear it is too late to stop the inevitable flow toward open fascism. Besides. The US virtually created modern Japan and had a large hand in China's move to capitalism. No doubt you have rejected all foreign made stuff and are posting by rubbing two sticks together.



I am a Christian, free market, balanced budget conservative Republican gun owner. Obviously you are mistaking me for someone else.



All evidence to the contrary.

You would argue with a tree stump. In the year 1929 the minimum age to get married in the United States was RAISED to 16. IIRC, it is still 16 in Scotland. So, while people do not traditionally get married until later in life, it was clearly acceptable in the past. The average age of WHEN people get married versus the legal age they COULD get married are worlds apart.

You are swinging at me aimlessly, covering up the fact that you projecting, but one would have to have an awfully low IQ to buy into your B.S. If there is a racist on this board, you see him each morning when you look in the mirror.

YOU are the one making a big deal out of accepting the fact that the world works as the world works. You are the one trying to rationalize your support of slavery, racism, and communism. I merely pointed out the fact that you have no problem with it. Otherwise, you would be doing something about it. You condemned ALL the early Americans because, before the War of Independence, they obeyed the law and went along to get along. You expect Thomas Jefferson and the rest of the men of his times to take actions against what you claim are bad, but you are too hypocritical to do those things in your own life.

You can say anything you like about me, but all you're proving is that you are judgmental, hypocritical, and you think you're all of that and a bag of chips. Yet when it comes to leading by example, you don't do it. You think you're smarter than the people you believe you are appealing to. I don't give a rat's ass about what you think about the Charter. I trust that those who don't want the government all up in their business to decide to follow their own conscience. And you are not anybody's conscience, no matter how hard you try to pretend you are. You accept slavery, racism, and communism in your own life and you make excuses for it and project your weaknesses onto me. I trust that most people who read this (even the majority that don't comment) realize that you are full of it.

[Pants-of-dog]

Nobody can force you to want to be the master of your own destiny. If you want someone else to pamper you and school you the rest of your life, that's your business. It's not an argument.

Since you are the one defending slavers, I find you do not have the moral high ground here.

[Drlee]

@The Resister

Again lying he posted:
You would argue with a tree stump. In the year 1929 the minimum age to get married in the United States was RAISED to 16. IIRC, it is still 16 in Scotland

There is no national age to get married in the US. Marriage is regulated solely by states. Just out of interest for others because Register will not care the age for marriage with parental consent is 12 years old in MA and 12 in NH. Without parental consent a 15 year old can marry in Mississippi. @The Resister claimed to be a lawyer awhile ago IIR. You would want a lawyer to be more careful than to make an amateur mistake like that.

Then he rambled incoherently for awhile. Suffice it to say he really doesn't want to get into the whole IQ thing with me nor I with him.

Then

You condemned ALL the early Americans because, before the War of Independence, they obeyed the law and went along to get along.

No I didn't. Why don't you post where I did. Debating with someone who simply makes shit up is tedious.

You expect Thomas Jefferson and the rest of the men of his times to take actions against what you claim are bad, but you are too hypocritical to do those things in your own life.

No. Again get an adult to read and help you with my posts. I am the one with low expectations of Jefferson. Obviously he did not take action against the things HE claimed are bad. As for my life, as much as you would like to imagine you do you really do not have a clue about how I behave.

Then he set to incoherently rambling again.

Wasn't it @The Resister who just claimed to be a Christian clergyman? Imagine that folks. Well. White sheets are cheaper than choir robes.

[The Resister]

Since you are the one defending slavers, I find you do not have the moral high ground here.

What kind of chicken squeeze stupidity is that? I defended NOBODY. You are lying and you know it. You have a serious problem with the truth.

[Pants-of-dog]

What kind of chicken squeeze stupidity is that? I defended NOBODY. You are lying and you know it. You have a serious problem with the truth.

Sorry, I thought you were defending the founding fathers and their ownership of slaves by explaining that everyone owned slaves back then and other justifications.

If you now agree that they violated the unalienable rights of others, then please ignore my previous post.

[The Resister]

Garbage. Do you like to start all of your posts with an abject lie? Clearly your tactic is to simply make shit up. How about you source this nonsense. Let me make a fool of your from the start. In 1910, when my grandmother was 14, the average age at marriage, not to mention having children was 21.6 for women. In 1890 it was actually older. Having children out of wedlock was very rare when I was a youngster not to mention in my grandmothers time. And you should keep in mind Sport that I AM the age of the grandparents of most people posting here and when I was 14, sex with a 14 year old, just like today, would buy you 20 years in the slammer. Very few of my friends were even having sex at 14.



This is illogical and unhinged. Exactly what is it that you are proposing? Rationalizing racism because, as you alibied the actions of the founders, everyone is doing it? (Oh yea. It is also bordering on xenophobic.)



I want people to consider your silly "Charter" and reject it as the garbage that it is just as I did. As for trade with China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia, I could not care less at this point. I am an American and believe it is time we fix our own wagon before we worry about others. We have just had a coup and I fear it is too late to stop the inevitable flow toward open fascism. Besides. The US virtually created modern Japan and had a large hand in China's move to capitalism. No doubt you have rejected all foreign made stuff and are posting by rubbing two sticks together.



I am a Christian, free market, balanced budget conservative Republican gun owner. Obviously you are mistaking me for someone else.



All evidence to the contrary.

You are the one starting EVERY post directed at me with a bald faced LIE. Projection will not protect you. It has been explained to you that the minimum legal age for marriage and the average age people get married are two different things. I don't need to prove squat. YOU DIDN'T. I am not your freaking push button monkey.

I'm not rationalizing a damn thing. It's been pointed out that if there is a racist on this thread, it is YOU. You seem to be awfully caught up in derailing my threads and wanting to start a personal whizzing contest with me. You should sue your brain for non-support (presuming you have one). You could win. All you seem to know about is xenophobes and racists while condemning a document that DEMANDS the unalienable Rights of all. What absolute and utter hypocrisy!

You like calling The Charter "garbage" because you are not what you claim, but rather you are hypocritical and cowardly plus knowingly LYING to boot. You think that the rest of the posters here are idiots, too stupid to make up their minds without your incessant B.S. and name calling. Anybody that would rely on you to evaluate The Charter is an idiot. You think if it doesn't make your cut, the next guy will weigh it through your eyes. You think others are too stupid to read it and accept or reject it. You are the one who condemns racism and then lives off of products made in communist countries and those that employ slave labor. And HELL no, I'm not rubbing two sticks together.

I'm open about what I'm doing. I'm doing the same, exact thing you are. I'm accepting things for what they are - except that I really feel strongly enough to have a boycott list. But, the deal is, I don't have to lie about people's character; don't have to start unnecessary whizzing contests; don't make idiotic allegations that I won't back up in person; don't hide like a scared rat and preach hypocrisy from the comfort of my keyboard. I don't presume that others are so stupid that they cannot read a document and evaluate it. The way you "fix your wagon" is to band together, circle the wagons and support one another. You don't do that. You waste every day coming here to engage in a whizzing contest THAT YOU STARTED. And you call yourself a Christian?? No wonder that MILLIONS of people are going elsewhere for some version of the truth.

As anyone with a modicum of intelligence can fathom from The Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man, I advocate unity and a sense of moral purpose. THAT is why I support the Charter. ALL you've done is advocate divisiveness and call me names in a cowardly and very UNCHRISTIAN manner. If you had the Spirit in you, you would be ashamed of yourself for initiating these kinds of exchanges. You would be ashamed to waste valuable time arguing when you could do something productive with your life. You're a wannabe, but you certainly are not like any Christian I've met in person. I'm not mistaking you for anyone except who you have shown us you really are.

[Drlee]

Another incoherent rant. You need to control yourself. You will do yourself an injury.

You came here, claiming to be a lawyer with vast legal experience and selling your Proclamation, asking us to sign it. Some if not most of us find your Proclamation absurd. For example, you, want us to believe that gun ownership is a God given right. I cannot think of anything less Christian than arming oneself to kill one's fellow man.

At the risk of committing a "no true Scotsman" fallacy, no true Christian could sign your document. As a conservative and constitutionalist I cannot either. The constitution is the supreme law of the land. There is no law above it. You may argue that God's law supersedes the constitution and I agree. But the way to reconcile this is to change the constitution if enough support can be garnered. And we did it. No true Christian could support slavery now or in the past. Jefferson knew this. So, acting within the constitution, we the people changed our evil ways.

I understand that you do not like to be contradicted and that you posted your tripe expecting no opposition. Too bad. That is not how life works sport. So when I make an argument clearly demonstrating to all that your arguments are fallacious you resort to personal attack. Now you want to talk about China and Saudi Arabia because you cannot refute my arguments. You somehow think so little of the participants in this forum that you think they will believe that I cannot argue with you because my pencil was made in China? And you do this while you are doing the same thing? And you are not a competent enough debater to understand that you will never prevail using all manner of red hares. I understand losing an argument is hard but changing the subject and making stuff up out of whole cloth is a poor debating technique and the last refuge of the beaten. Here is an example:

It has been explained to you that the minimum legal age for marriage and the average age people get married are two different things.

Not the question. YOU brought up two things. You said that 14 year old marriage was common in the early 1900's as well as in colonial America. Using referenced facts I proved you wrong. Then you posted some nonsense about a national marriage age enacted in the twenties. I proved you wrong. You should spend more time developing your arguments and less time simply making stuff up.

If you had the Spirit in you, you would be ashamed of yourself for initiating these kinds of exchanges.

On the contrary. It is my Christian duty to expose un-Christian ideas for what they are. God did not send his Son to warn us to arm ourselves against one another. Quite the opposite actually. Jesus did not ask the crowd to pull their swords and save him from the cross.

Most importantly is that democracy is hard work. We have lost ours because we did not do the work. And we did not lose it to "liberals and Communists". We lost it to people just like you.

We have one chance and one chance only. That is for the Republicans to run a moderate candidate for president and win. Only then can the party get its feet under itself and allow American democracy to continue. I fear this will not happen. The far right has gone to far already and American democracy is, in my opinion already dead and gone. But I will continue to plug away in my Republican party trying to get it to drop the far right lunacy (like your proclamation) and voter suppression as a political tactic and embrace the constitution again. I know it is probably a losing battle but I will keep trying. And when I hear or read stuff like you are trying to sell I will confront it and expose it for what it is.