- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:26 pm to Harry Boutte
I made my point. You want to deflect from it because you were wrong.
Tough shite.
Tough shite.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:26 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'll say this again You can take his OP and replace "libertarian" with "small government conservative" and his point still stands.
Are you a nationalist?
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:26 pm to Harry Boutte
quote:
You don't see an issue with "subject to the jurisdiction"?
There is a thread currently on page 1 about this.
I'll just summarize: Wong Kim Ark already defined this with a textual and historical analysis that I don't see how any textualist would change without venturing into hypocrisy for political desires.
quote:
but it seems like that's what's going to get hashed out this time.
Already has been.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:26 pm to SlayTime
quote:
Are you a nationalist?
Define how you're using the term
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:27 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Clown
Oh so you surrendered. That’s cute.
Not often you get embarrassed so thoroughly, is it?
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:33 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
I made my point.
Roger mentioned "security". That's when I entered the chat. It's a valid question to ask what the Constitution has to say about "security" in the context. The context here is "security".
Do you have any idea what the Constitution says about "security"?
It's not a deflection when it's the very reason I entered the discussion.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:33 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Define how you're using the term
Civic vs Ethnic
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:34 pm to OBReb6
As a registered Libertarian I will defend it on the point that political advertisers and pollsters are a lot more likely to leave you alone during election season. I get very few mailers and other political spam in my mailbox or on my voice messaging which is just the way I like it.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
The point I'm seeing discussed outside of Wong (no offense), is that while Wong put himself under the jurisdiction of the US, immigrants knowingly coming here illegally are not doing that. There's not good faith effort to act as citizens when your very presence is unlawful.
But let me try to catch up with that discussion in the other thread.
But let me try to catch up with that discussion in the other thread.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:39 pm to Harry Boutte
Individual rights as seen by the federal government didn’t exist until the 14th amendment
So this alleged appeal to individualism by the founders in the US constitution is shaky ground. People should be more honest about it and not drag the founders into this discussion, and just abide by the interpretations as they are now agreed on to make their point.
So this alleged appeal to individualism by the founders in the US constitution is shaky ground. People should be more honest about it and not drag the founders into this discussion, and just abide by the interpretations as they are now agreed on to make their point.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:42 pm to SlayTime
quote:
Civic vs Ethnic
That's not a definition
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:44 pm to Harry Boutte
quote:
The point I'm seeing discussed outside of Wong (no offense), is that while Wong put himself under the jurisdiction of the US, immigrants knowingly coming here illegally are not doing that. There's not good faith effort to act as citizens when your very presence is unlawful.
I understand the distinction you're trying to make, but it ignores that "subject to the jurisdiction" was already "hashed out" and this distinction is irrelevant within that analytical framework.
This attempt (not by you, but the people creating content on the issue you're consuming) to be clever and pretend that they can distinguish away WKA, and that this would be a novel ruling instead of overruling a longstanding Supreme Court precedent, shows they either didn't read WKA or are being intentionally obtuse to cater to their audience.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:45 pm to OBReb6
quote:
Individual rights as seen by the federal government didn’t exist until the 14th amendment
That's not entirely accurate.
The 14A expanded the concept of some rights but primarily created the path towards incorporation by the states of the rights in the Constitution.
So we had individual rights, but only for federal purposes, for the most part.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:48 pm to OBReb6
Good government will assist with foreign policy, energy, and the economy....
Good government will stay out of personal issues.....
Good government presses to stay small
Good government will stay out of personal issues.....
Good government presses to stay small
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:48 pm to SlowFlowPro
Fair enough, I was being overly broad with that statement. I still contend it muddies the waters for the absolutism of the “individual rights” arguments some are making here from the constitution and tying it to the founders intent.
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:49 pm to NIH
quote:
There’s a high correlation between libertarian beliefs and anime fandom
Why is that?
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:52 pm to Espritdescorps
quote:
Why is that?
Anime is the hyper idealized version of animated media
Libertarianism is the hyper idealized version of classical liberal individualism that ignores human nature and imperfect systems
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That's not a definition
Definitions per the polsci institute
Based on these definitions, does your political ideology align with either or pieces of both?
Posted on 2/16/25 at 6:53 pm to Espritdescorps
quote:
Why is that?
It's just in/out group attacks to ostracize people who didn't shed libertarianism (that used to be the dominant philosophy on here) for MAGA populist authoritarianism, because THAT is what the cool kids are doing now.
This post was edited on 2/16/25 at 6:54 pm
Page 11 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News