does this sound constitutional?

first, Hello everyone, my name Is Jeremy and I live on a small Island called Oahu, yeah, it's part of the United States(get asked that more then one would think) It's in a chain of Island's called Hawaii(yes, there all in the US!)(oh yeah and we have electricity and cable, I dont have to send notes on birds to get people to post on the forum for me and my house is not a grass shack, kinda looks like one but it just needs a few repairs). love the site, been planning on intruducing myself but havent gotten around to it, I practice the art of procrastination, you should read the book, if I ever got around to reading it I would recommend it!
now to the subject at hand.
I am actually very verble (obviously illiterate tho) about my rights being invaded by the holy rolling, bible thumping, clinic bombing, cult having mass suicide people(mostly southerners, not my fault Im just saying is all). I take offense when pleople say who can and cant get married(not gay, but if I was I would want someone to stand up for me) because of a god they cant prove exist's(the fact they dont accept the proof I have that he doesnt exist is mute at this point). However I dont take offense to things that were written before the Pollitically correct could stop them. this is how they talked then, this is the way it was, we cant go and change our entire history of a nation to please the newbies that now are whinning about such trivial things. if you want all refence of religion removed from all scripts of the entire planet(or even our own country) you are not very wise on your priorities. focus that attention on getting US to stop invading Iraq(and this will begin a whole new thread, what a way for me to introduce myself to a group of people I want a lot of help from!!)
as long as we dont enforce such things as "must be GOD FREARING" in our current court I dont see the problem, oh and to have all things completly void of religion is impossible, to not mention any god/spiritual/beastiality(had to throw it in just for you goodburbon) is to allude toward a agnostic/atheist style, which is a form of religion!
to not believe in god/s is your veiw of what is beyond this world(or lack there off) which is what all religions are. now we can not seperate all religion from state can we?

if your reason to want to remove all reference to god is for legal reasons, I.E. a person contest's it because he/she is not "god fearing" and therefor does not apply to that "rule" then you must be a lawyer that needs to be castrated! that is all on that.
goodnight, Jeremy
 
in2fords said:
first, Hello everyone, my name Is Jeremy and I live on a small Island called Oahu, yeah, it's part of the United States(get asked that more then one would think) It's in a chain of Island's called Hawaii(yes, there all in the US!)(oh yeah and we have electricity and cable, I dont have to send notes on birds to get people to post on the forum for me and my house is not a grass shack, kinda looks like one but it just needs a few repairs). love the site, been planning on intruducing myself but havent gotten around to it, I practice the art of procrastination, you should read the book, if I ever got around to reading it I would recommend it!
now to the subject at hand.
I am actually very verble (obviously illiterate tho) about my rights being invaded by the holy rolling, bible thumping, clinic bombing, cult having mass suicide people(mostly southerners, not my fault Im just saying is all). I take offense when pleople say who can and cant get married(not gay, but if I was I would want someone to stand up for me) because of a god they cant prove exist's(the fact they dont accept the proof I have that he doesnt exist is mute at this point). However I dont take offense to things that were written before the Pollitically correct could stop them. this is how they talked then, this is the way it was, we cant go and change our entire history of a nation to please the newbies that now are whinning about such trivial things. if you want all refence of religion removed from all scripts of the entire planet(or even our own country) you are not very wise on your priorities. focus that attention on getting US to stop invading Iraq(and this will begin a whole new thread, what a way for me to introduce myself to a group of people I want a lot of help from!!)
as long as we dont enforce such things as "must be GOD FREARING" in our current court I dont see the problem, oh and to have all things completly void of religion is impossible, to not mention any god/spiritual/beastiality(had to throw it in just for you goodburbon) is to allude toward a agnostic/atheist style, which is a form of religion!
to not believe in god/s is your veiw of what is beyond this world(or lack there off) which is what all religions are. now we can not seperate all religion from state can we?

if your reason to want to remove all reference to god is for legal reasons, I.E. a person contest's it because he/she is not "god fearing" and therefor does not apply to that "rule" then you must be a lawyer that needs to be castrated! that is all on that.
goodnight, Jeremy
Click to expand...

Hell of an introduction, just jump right into the fire. I like that. I only disagree on the points that A.)how exactly can you consider the lack of religion a religion? and B.) The US isn't invading Iraq, the invasion is done. We are occupying Iraq until we feel they can govern and police themselves at least half assed.

and welcome:cheers: to :NAXJA:
 
Last edited:
thanx for the welcome. right into the fire has allways been my style.
that pic of spam is making me hungry, better get it from Mcdonalds.

your right about Iraq, now dont get me wrong, Im not some bleading heart liberal that is bitching about us killing everyone over there. in fact I could be the opposite, my veiw is who cares about them, why are we struggling to survive when they dont even want us there? sure it was hard for them with sadistic sadam(he's not alowed to kill them, thats our job!) but more people are suffering in other parts of the world that would not require lost of American Lives to help. and dont give me this "threat to America" crap, we all new thier wasnt anything limpdick housen get his hands on. I love when people come back at me with "thats what they get for 9-11" freaking inbreds are allowed to vote and it scares me.

ANYWAY, back on topic
lack of religion is a religion. anything a person thinks of after life, or beliefs of spiritualiy is their religion. that is what they live by, that is what the practice, one persons religion includes god/s and my religion has no gods, no coming back, nothing after I die! it is still a religion, it's beyond a thought it is a belief, and a belief without proof is a religion. I know it's a streach but I make it work in my mind!

I better get back to work before they fire me, oh wait, Im doing my job. I got to get used to this desk job stuff.
Jeremy
 
Evolution is a religion. It requires every bit as much faith as Christianity. There has yet to be any kind of proof that hasn't been disputed, and when you'vegot odds like evolution has against it, ya kinda need some sort of proof for it.

I could go around telling everyone my jeep has hidden rockets and is capable at flying just below the speed of light (any faster and it'd be torn apart and I'd be sent back in time) and unless I actually took them for a ride or showed a video, no one would ever believe me. Yet, tell that there were thousands and millions of occurrences that, had Vegas been around, would've been rated at impossible odds to lead up to us. Hell, a woodpecker doesn't make evolutionary sense. His beak has to be super strong and reinforced or else it'd break and kill him when he first slammed it into a tree. But he also has to have a cushion around his brain that was thicked than the rest of the birds or else his brain would get battered, swell, and he'd die. Get one before the other he dies. The chances of either spontaneously developing? Pretty small. The chance of either happening together? Even smaller.
 
who knows, the answers won't be uncovered in this thread thats for sure.
but what i do know is religion is religion and government is government and if you think someone is stupid for changing from "old" or "traditional" ways then you will always be limited by that factor. Think about fiber optics, they allow us to send signals other than 1's and 0's to communicate and essentially unlock possiblities of infinate proportions...but the traditional way is binary 1's and 0's...so I guess by your logic it's ok to just be how we are and never actually step up to the plate and do something better with our minds and technology. Same applies to the preamble from my original post, once you discover your being a hypocrite or something isn't lining up right..FIX it don't continue to promote ignorance.
any who.
 
long but if you missed it on the yahoo headliner here it is

By DAN SEWELL, Associated Press Writer 4 minutes ago


CINCINNATI - The Bush administration can continue its warrantless surveillance program while it appeals a judge's ruling that the program is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
[SIZE=-2]ADVERTISEMENT[/SIZE]
var lrec_target="_top";var lrec_URL=new Array();lrec_URL[1]="";var lrec_flashfile="http://us.a2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/in/insweb/092506_flash_top.swf?clickTAG=javascript:LRECopenWindow(1)";var lrec_altURL="";var lrec_altimg="http://us.a2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/a/in/insweb/092506_yahoo_newsandsports_dirty_rustic_flash_backup091906.jpg";var lrec_width=299;var lrec_height=43; on error resume next plugin = ( IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFlash.6")))
092506_yahoo_newsandsports_dirty_rustic_flash_backup091906.jpg
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Yes[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]No[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Yes[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]No[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Yes[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]No[/FONT] if (window.yzq_a == null) document.write("");if (window.yzq_a){yzq_a('p', 'P=2ZnYDkSOwhUMKkyFRQuz3APKGEqbtUUkILUAAZV6&T=1a7aiocuu%2fX%3d1159995573%2fE%3d83018502%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d1.1%2fW%3d8%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d908393764%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJpdDtDaXJjdWl0O3RlcnJvcmlzdDtnb3Zlcm5tZW50O1NhbjtTZWN1cml0eTtyZWZ1cmxfd3d3X3lhaG9vX2NvbSIgcmVmdXJsPSJyZWZ1cmxfd3d3X3lhaG9vX2NvbSIgdG9waWNzPSJyZWZ1cmxfd3d3X3lhaG9vX2NvbSI-%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d46C28E44');yzq_a('a', '&U=13avh1trc%2fN%3dGQA8DESOxLw-%2fC%3d386999.9393467.10128431.1442997%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d4000797');}
b

The president has said the program is needed in the war on terrorism; opponents argue it oversteps constitutional boundaries on free speech, privacy and executive powers.
The unanimous ruling from a three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals gave little explanation for the decision. In the three-paragraph ruling, judges said that they balanced the likelihood an appeal would succeed, the potential damage to both sides and the public interest.
U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit ruled Aug. 17 that the program was unconstitutional because it violates the rights to free speech and privacy and the separation of powers in the Constitution.
The Justice Department had urged the appeals court to allow it to keep the program in place while it argues its appeal, claiming that the nation faced "potential irreparable harm." The appeal is likely to take months.
"The country will be more vulnerable to a terrorist attack," the government motion said.
The program monitors international phone calls and e-mails to or from the United States involving people the government suspects have terrorist links. A secret court has been set up to grant warrants for such surveillance, but the government says it can't always wait for a court to take action.
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit seeking to stop the program on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say it has made it difficult for them to do their jobs because they believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets. Many said they had been forced to take expensive and time-consuming overseas trips because their contacts wouldn't speak openly on the phone or because they didn't want to violate their contacts' confidentiality.
Similar lawsuits challenging the program have been filed by other groups, including in New York and San Francisco. The issue could wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
 
how does it really effect you?
what do you have to hide?

its not like the government is going to listen to YOUR phone conversations, and if they did, what would they hear, "work sucked today... my jeep..." nonsense, they wouldnt care to hear what you or any normal person would have to say. its not like the government has a task force that listens in on every average joes phone and computer...

im willing to hear a little clicking in the backround so that the gov can more easily weed out terrorists and criminals... but thats just me
 
rocklandxjer said:
how does it really effect you?
what do you have to hide?

its not like the government is going to listen to YOUR phone conversations, and if they did, what would they hear, "work sucked today... my jeep..." nonsense, they wouldnt care to hear what you or any normal person would have to say. its not like the government has a task force that listens in on every average joes phone and computer...

im willing to hear a little clicking in the backround so that the gov can more easily weed out terrorists and criminals... but thats just me
Click to expand...

So your saying it's ok to give up your rights to privacy...because some terrorist attacked us...your basically saying "i've got nothing to hide no worries" So I guess since I've seen naked women before you wouldn't mind me seeing your wife naked if she sent you an e-mail of her and your last name just happened to be hijibaba or something right...

I guess the terrorist have won, they hate us for our freedom so they attack us, and look what they accomplished out of it, little by little our freedom gets pieced away in the name of avoiding "terrorism"
red alert, yellow flag, orange alert...you don't see a green terrorist alert on there, and we haven't been bombed since 911 so wouldn't you say terrorist levels have been in the green?

And they are from what I know of storing all these calls in a huge database, one of the largest ever made...and it's not just your average foreign targets it's everyones calls. Think about the potentials of future use against you.
 
o believe me, i am not for it, but in times like these, I could care less. my name isnt tajibibabala-maham... i understand that its infringing on rights of privacy, im just saying...

anyway, im sure there are people, especially in government who have been doing this same thing for decades. no doubt about it. the only thing this law has done has been to make it so that charges can be brought up in court as viable evidence, without enough probable cause for a search warrent.

you cant seriously believe that with the passage of this law came the first time the government ever secretly and illegally tapped someones fone or email or whatever to get info... thats just silly

edit:

and i do not deny the possibility of a "huge database" but i definately question its viability... the gov. would have nothing to gain from recording every phone message ever sent... maybe phone records for selected individuals, but every call... thats trillions of calls every year..
 
dzolcali said:
I guess the terrorist have won, they hate us for our freedom so they attack us...
Click to expand...
No, its because of American foreign policy. Until that changes, the onslaught will likely continue...
dzolcali said:
And they are from what I know of storing all these calls in a huge database, one of the largest ever made...and it's not just your average foreign targets it's everyones calls. Think about the potentials of future use against you.
Click to expand...
Okay, think carefully about this one. Don't think of possibility, as literally anything's possible. Instead, just for fun, think of this idea in terms of probability. How probable is it that is happening. Who would man it? Who would determine how to tap or record or isolate the calls or interpret the data or decide targets or how to hide this practice, how to store the data, how to categorize in meaningfully so that it could be called back later to use against someone, etcetera. Now do you see how unwieldy, unlikely, improbable and impossible the entire concept is?
 
let me google it and see what i come up with, but i seriously think I remember reading an article about it and it was linked to the patriot act. Now positive but let me check on it before someone qoutes me and calls me out about it.
 
As a former governement employee, I always assumed my e-mails where being monitored, phones periodically monitored and probably at one time or another, my life has been scrutinized rather closely. On occasion I'm sure they have crawled up my rear with a microscope.
I always had to chuckle when my computer was hacked, I've no doubt the hacker opened himself up to some serious scrutinay.
I've also noticed, those appointed above me, mention things in passing conversation that I'm certain came from monitoring. On numerous occasions. I'm not nearly as dumb as they think I am.
Most people have some sort of blairing personality flaw or phoible. Even those with security clearances.
Do you really think, anybody actually cares about 99.9% of your mundane life?
 
nah not really but even still I like to think that my thoughts and ideas are secret when i'm on the phone. For instance what if I had a crazy plausible idea that I wanted to share with a friend and then they tapped in and stole it and patent it before I could. Things like that...who cares if they care about my life...obviously they do if they are going to tap that many peoples lives...it's invasion of privacy no matter how "big" or "little" a person is on the importance totem pole, it's unconstitutional and if you allow it to happen then you are not american at heart in my opinion.

Mud I respect your opinion probably the most out of all posters I have read in here..just to let you know you drop some serious sh!t when you post and I enjoy reading it.

peace
 
I think it would be irresponsible for them not to monitor. If just 1 percent of the population are certifiable, that is like 3 million nut jobs running around the US alone. Trying to monitor foriegn nut jobs, just makes sense to me.
What I do think, is that the watchers should be subject to at least the same (if not more) scrutinay than the average person. I think two classes, the watchers and the watched is just another class distinction that we don't need, too many already.
I have no problem with it at all, as long as it is equitable, which is unlikely.
Monitoring has been going on for a long time (through many administrations), for decades and it becomes a topic periodically. Not a knew revelation.
 
Drizzle

The second paragraph of your proof of a giant recording database clearly states

"This program does not involve the NSA listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, sources said in separate interviews."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fullsizexj
Presidential and congress powers
Replies
3
Views
470
XJEEPER
XJEEPER
M
Hey how does everbody like our ISLAMIC president
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
tkjeeper
tkjeeper
ECKSJAY
A Time To Grieve
2 3
Replies
49
Views
2K
IslanderOffRoad
IslanderOffRoad
I
Defend the Constitution=terrorist (according to this...)
Replies
13
Views
888
IndyXJ
I
Ironmen77
From Neal Boortz
Replies
0
Views
384
Ironmen77
Ironmen77
Back
Top