Quiet please, test in progress - POLL

Introductions The Full30 News & Updates
1

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

There are 27 amendments added to the original 7 articles,

How many do you feel are securely protected and exercised?

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

  • Churches are closed, seemingly all in unison and voluntarily, though all have a 501c status to protect I’d guess, limits placed on how many of we the people can assemble, done at request of each states governor, private entities silence conspiracy theories about what is happening

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

  • Do red flag laws follow this prescribed formula?

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

  • Both of these are hugely significant and deserve deep personal reflection on personal values, and two small letters should not be read over but rather stopped on and singled out, “or”

Amendment XIII
Section 1 . Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude…

I’ll leave further enumeration open to comments but will touch on

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

So the POLL, as a teacher hoovering over the shoulder of your testing pupils how do you predict the final grade

  • PASS
  • FAIL
  • Other - posted below
0 voters
3 Likes
2

You have been reading that pocket constitution AJ hands out again haven’t you?

There is a lot to unpack here.
I’ll start by asking everyones favorite question; What constitutes a person?
When does a person become a person?

This has recently divided our nation in regards to abortion.
The line runs almost down the middle of left and right.

Personally I feel that the legality of abortion should be left to the states, and people of the states.
But every election cycle, like clockwork, the GOP drags it out and beats it with a club.
It irritates me because this issue is the most divisive issue, right behind immigration, that they could drag out.
If they would just drop that, leave it to the states, we would have a much easier time getting votes.

6 Likes
3

Lets get this straight, the same recipe is whipped up every four years to feed the gulag its gruel?

4 Likes
4

Abortion, immigration, economy, debt, jobs, foreign policy, military spending.
I see one of those things as not being ennumerated in the constitution as a federal power depending on a definition.
But it comes down to a definition no one can agree on.
When the sperm enters the egg? When the first cell divides? When it has a tiny beating heart?When it has arms and legs? When the brain develops an electrical signal?
It is an impossible thing for a legislative body to decide.
Therefore it should go to the states, and the people of the states.

3 Likes
5

And the reason I pick that topic in response to your initial post; because human rights cannot exist without the individual.
And when exactly does an individual become an indivual with rights?
Everything else follows that.

2 Likes
6

There is no legality to abortion. Murder is the taking of a HUMAN life without justification. Since when is getting laid a justifiable cause for the taking of human life. Let me address your question, when does a human being become a human being, 9months after inception? Oh by the way what does inception mean, here let me help:
an act, process, or instance of beginning. Beginning of what…a human LIFE that’s what! The Declaration of Independence makes it clear what the Founders had in mind when this nation was formed and I quote: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,. Doesn’t seem to me that it is an issue of who has any legal standing since it is clear beyond doubt that the first and preeminent right we have is the right to life, without which there is no need for the right to liberty or the pursuit of happiness. Not a state’s right and not a federal right. The right to life is an INDIVIDUAL right and only in the case of causative action can it be legally taken by another party. Since no such action exists in abortion, thus it is simply murder for convenience, and the denial of a human being to the right to life.

5 Likes
7

Is contraception murder?
Is some type of morning after pill murder?
Does an unfertilized egg have rights?
Does a single fertilized egg have rights?
Does an embryo have rights?

How do we go about deciding that, who decides, and does it require a constitutional convention?

2 Likes
8

Is sperm a human being? No.
Is the ovum a human being? No
When does a human being become a human being at the moment of inception.
You read into it what you would like or not. I really don’t care because a human being IS a person and if we needlessly kill a human being then yes we are destroying a human life without just cause.

4 Likes
9

So, a human being is created, and all the rights granted a human being by the power of God, at the moment of conception?

Now, since the fertilized egg on through the embryo, to the point of birth, is entirely dependant upon the mother, an individual with individual rights, what happens to the rights of the mother should they conflict with the child in utero?
For example, complications of pregnancy that endanger the right to life of either party.
What about a pregnancy brought about by violence?
What about disease?

These are the arguments that arise if we say life begins at conception.

I haven’t said what I believe.
This is a thought experiment.

4 Likes
10

Abortion is not a right . But you can not get rid of it by legislation the only way you will make it a rare thing is to educate people on how not to get pregnant.

4 Likes
11

But we could clarify the definition of human life in the constitution to reflect that life, and all the rights given to life, begin at the moment of conception.

3 Likes
12

Speaking of free speech and the 1st ammendment.

They will ban the app.

Who owns speech?
If someone is speaking, can we unplug their microphone?
Google- “Well we own the microphone, and we don’t like what you are saying, so we are unplugging our microphone.”

What if google buys up all the microphones?
Do they control all the speech?

3 Likes
13

image
image455×574 110 KB

Commerce is the market for paid speech, so it can be regulated in that venue

3 Likes
14

The millisecond two cells with different DNA combine.

5 Likes
15

That seems like a unique and scientifically identifiable moment/event.
Maybe difficult to determine in the field.
But certainly a solid scientific event.

I am not saying we actually need to ammend the constitution.
The question I have;
Will it take a constitutional ammendment that defines a human life as beginning at the moment of conception, in order to resolve the issue of abortion?

Does the government play a role in protecting our rights; such as freedom of speech, in the face of mega corporations which seek to control our speech via the platforms upon which we express our rights?

3 Likes
16

I can not answer the poll, but I can tell you what my 14 year old niece said last time I saw her.
We were talking about history, and why she does not know the constitution at her age.
Her reply:
“We are not focusing on that in school, this year. The school board said that history is a minor class”

and you wonder why the last few generations are clueless.

7 Likes
17

We weren’t taught specifically about the constitution, as it relates to our personal right, either in school back in the mid 80’s.
Yet we stood an crossed our hearts and pledged alleigance to the flag every day.

The constitution has not changed.
Our methods of expression have.
If someone speaks in a public place, they have expressed their 1st ammendment right.
If another person, or group of persons… google, buys up all the public land, and kicks out everyone that says something they do not like… what then?

“Well, it’s google’s website and they can ban Alex Jone’s application if they want”.

Is hosting or having hosted an application protected by the first ammendment?

5 Likes
18

No, this lies strictly on us, we the people.
We need to let people have a fist fight with out fear of legal interruptions.
We need to be the ones to increase our due diligence. We need to stand up, put the phone down, silence our ego, restrict our wants in exchange for our future generations needs/rights.
We the people are at fault, me, you, all of us. The lack of action in our current situation could be “blamed on” our proximity of the real issue. A problem this big requires a physical solution.

As a parent I try to do my best, but if you are telling your self “you did good enough” you already failed. If you say you could have done better, good and do more and better next time, and the time again.

The answer to the question is far to expansive to be answered here and I’m sure that we all have different opinions on it.

This probably isn’t the answer you wanted but it’s what I got Brother.

5 Likes
19

The Seven Laws of Noah have a nuanced take on this. Not a rabbi, but from what I’ve read, there are stages. While abortion IS generally forbidden, there are exceptions for the health of the mother.

Also, the particular sin in abortion isn’t actual murder until the major part of the baby has come out, like the head, or most of its body. Until then, the fetus has the sanctity of potential life and (excepting severe cases) must not be harmed.

Based on the code, it seems that a person performing an abortion (before the baby’s birth) in violation of Noahide Law would not be liable to any penalty, unless they could have been expected to learn what Noahide Law says on the topic. Even if they did know, since there are no Noahide Courts with punitive jurisdiction, no courts could impose a penalty anyway.

However, once the baby is born and clearly an independent human being, ignorance of the law is no excuse, since killing the baby is clearly murder, even without study. The penalty would be death by beheading. Not a lawyer, but this “post-birth abortion” is clear-cut murder even in current secular law. Again, with no Noahide Courts, it’s up to the secular justice system here.

4 Likes
20

Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
GOD disagrees.

9 Likes