Justice Kennedy

[CowboyJD]

Well, you answered your own question, you changed your original post, you went from cite the law to you actually quoting the law. And my response was in my dissertation.

Nope. Didn't change anything.

Cite doesn't mean quote. Cite means give the statute.

And no, you didn't state under what law you registered your seven guns.

In fact, you contradicted your earlier claim that you had registered them when you said, "I would prefer to not have to register them, but if it is law I will follow the law."

You did KINDA answer the original question

Got any problem with registering your firearms with the Feds?

For identification purposes only, of course.

When you said that you would prefer not to, but would if there was a law requiring you to do so.

To which I would respond, you are a remarkably compliant when it comes to willingly forfeiting your civil rights at the request of the government.

 

[cowboy-curt]

I don't agree with this parent, but the well-being of that child is not my responsibility.

So you would stand silent if a child were being abused in public?

Whether this is certain decision to not list their biological sex is psychological abuse or not isn't the point but the idea we as a country and/or society don't have a social responsibility and obligation to look out for others who cannot protect themselves is plain ignorance or stupidity. I can't decide which.

As far as the anti-government sentiments, I suggest you search other countries for citizenship because in order to run a country of our size with our infrastructure, programs, and military requires certain conditions to be met including but not limited to paying taxes, social security issuance, age verification, genealogy, and future passports/immigration rights.

Also, it's most likely a moot point if said person was born in a hospital as almost all facilities in the USA will report basic birth info to State Health Departments which records all births that take place in their facilities.

I mean if you really want to go hide from the government, so be it. Your child most likely won't be able to legally attend a public education institution, travel outside of the country legally, and will run into countless issues when finding a job.

 

[OKSTATE1]

Nope. Didn't change anything.

Cite doesn't mean quote. Cite means give the statute.

And no, you didn't state under what law you registered your seven guns.

In fact, you contradicted your earlier claim that you had registered them when you said, "I would prefer to not have to register them, but if it is law I will follow the law."

You did KINDA answer the original question



When you said that you would prefer not to, but would if there was a law requiring you to do so.

To which I would respond, you are a remarkably compliant when it comes to willingly forfeiting your civil rights at the request of the government.

I am not under cross examination so I do not owe you a simple Yes or No answer. Second, I am dang sure not telling you what type of guns I have by my answer.

I am not compliant, I am a law abiding citizen and not going to apologize for that. As for the trusting the government comment, few on this board probably as well armed as I am.

 

[CowboyJD]

I am not under cross examination so I do not owe you a simple Yes or No answer. Second, I am dang sure not telling you what type of guns I have.

I am not compliant, I am a law abiding citizen and not going to apologize for that. As for the trusting the government, few on this board probably as well armed as I am.

I don't need a simple yes or no answer. It's all here.

It's clear you weren't being truthful (or completely ignorant) when you said you had registered all seven of your guns because it was the law.

Good talk.

 

[CowboyJD]

Whether this is certain decision to not list their biological sex is psychological abuse or not isn't the point but the idea we as a country and/or society don't have a social responsibility and obligation to look out for others who cannot protect themselves is plain ignorance or stupidity. I can't decide which.

Since whether or not the government should be able to compel listing their biological sex was the exact act being discussed, it's kind of the entire point.

Which you conflated and strawmanned into someone making a general argument that the government can't intervene to protect children from actual harm by their parents.

 

[squeak]

So you would stand silent if a child were being abused in public?

That's a completely different situation.

 

[cowboy-curt]

That's a completely different situation.

So the well-being of other children matters to you?

 

[squeak]

So the well-being of other children matters to you?

Your child's healthcare is not my problem. How you raise your kid is none of my business. If you abuse your kids, that's against the law and that's about the point where I would say/do something.

 

[CowboyJD]

So the well-being of other children matters to you?

Context of the discussion being had.

How does it work?

Contextual and situational opinions instead of binary absolutes.

Look into them.

 

[CowboyJD]

Law of unintended consequences when you want a nanny state involved in child rearing decisions beyond clear and present abuse by the parents.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/charlie...tish-baby-global-debate-rare-genetic-disease/

After all, the state is acting in the best interests of Charlie Gard...according to them.

They are refusing the parents right to submit the child to experimental treatment that could cause harm or additional pain to the child and as WCPoke said in the "Freedom!" thread.....parents should never be allowed to treat their kids as an experiment.