1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

More Egregious Affront to the US Constituions

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by giddyup, Jan 2, 2006.

?

Which is the more egregious affront to the US Constitution?

  1. Illegally wire-tapping communications with Terrorists

    43 vote(s)
    56.6%
  2. Legally aborting an unborn child

    14 vote(s)
    18.4%
  3. Both

    5 vote(s)
    6.6%
  4. Neither

    14 vote(s)
    18.4%
  1. giddyup

    giddyup Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,466
    Likes Received:
    488
    Which is the more egregious affront to the US Constitution?

    Oops, the thread title lists Constituion as plural. I know there is only one... but with all those amendments to a perfect document.
     
    #1 giddyup, Jan 2, 2006
    Last edited: Jan 2, 2006
  2. Mulder

    Mulder Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 1999
    Messages:
    7,118
    Likes Received:
    81
    Apparently the unnamed kind...
     
  3. RocketMan Tex

    RocketMan Tex Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    18,452
    Likes Received:
    119
    Which of the zero options you listed are you referring to? :D
     
  4. giddyup

    giddyup Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,466
    Likes Received:
    488
    Can you all not see the poll? I can, but then I am mystic... :D
     
  5. Mulder

    Mulder Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 1999
    Messages:
    7,118
    Likes Received:
    81
    Oh this isn't loaded at all...
     
  6. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    There's more than one Constituion [sic]?

    who knew!

    :D
     
  7. giddyup

    giddyup Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,466
    Likes Received:
    488
    If you can say an unborn child is not a human and feel good about it, I can say that a conversation with terrorists is not privileged and sacrosanct and feel <b>really</b> good about it.

    :D
     
  8. ROXRAN

    ROXRAN Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    18,822
    Likes Received:
    5,227
    The attack on YOUR bill of rights by rich, liberalistic, political hedons, who masquerade a concern about rights in vaquealistic manner, yet will spit on the paper at #2.
     
  9. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    Giddy

    I'll try this again (hopefully without being called a traitor). No one here has any problem that I can see with wiretapping terrorists. The problems arise when you have an administration that circumvents the law (a law put in place for this very reason) and does not obtain the necessary warrants to conduct said wiretaps.

    It's really not that hard to understand.
     
  10. basso

    basso Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    33,415
    Likes Received:
    9,322
    2 Questions:

    1) When was FISA written?
    2) When did Al Gore invent the interwebs?
     
  11. ROXRAN

    ROXRAN Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    18,822
    Likes Received:
    5,227
    This is kinda like the Vietnam veterans seeing a threat, and having to call washington, thousands of miles away to "assess" the correct action to take, and hoping the time allotment doesn't cost more lives. This is quantitative analysis that liberalistic folks like Mcnamara was great at, but the point is it doesn't work.

    I'm all for circumventing said "law", but if it is for the purpose of r****ding a realized threat, then I have no problem.
     
  12. Mulder

    Mulder Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 1999
    Messages:
    7,118
    Likes Received:
    81
    1. 1978
    2. he never said he did and you know it. http://www.sethf.com/gore/

    FISA, which was enacted in 1978, contains provisions that limit such surveillance to communications "exclusively between foreign powers," specifically stating that the president may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order only if there is "no substantial likelihood" that the communications of "a United States person" -- a U.S. citizen or anyone else legally in the United States -- will be intercepted. Such provisions do not allow for the Bush administration's authorization of domestic surveillance of communications between persons inside the United States and parties outside the country.

    FISA also allows the president and the attorney general to conduct surveillance without a court order for the purpose of gathering "foreign intelligence information" for "a period" no more than 15 days "following a declaration of war by the Congress." This provision does not permit Bush's conduct either, as he acknowledged that he had reauthorized the program more than 30 times since 2001, and said that the program is "reviewed approximately every 45 days."

    PS what do I win?
     
  13. gwayneco

    gwayneco Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2000
    Messages:
    3,459
    Likes Received:
    36
    There is no court case holding that what the President did is illegal, and legal opinions are all over the board. It's an unsettled area of the law.

    By the way, I don't consider you a traitor because you think Bush acted illegally. I think you are a traitor because you want to reward those who have leaked classified info on this program. You can state that Bush's actions were illegal and still want those who leaked to be punished. I would disagree with that position, but I would not find it treasonous.
     
  14. ROXRAN

    ROXRAN Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    18,822
    Likes Received:
    5,227
  15. ROXRAN

    ROXRAN Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2000
    Messages:
    18,822
    Likes Received:
    5,227
    Rest assured, the legal authority has been demonstrated and established.

    Please refer to the document before making ignorant contradictions...
     
  16. giddyup

    giddyup Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,466
    Likes Received:
    488
    That's why I qualified it with "illegally" and also qualified the abortion as "legal."

    That is where the question was really loaded, IMHO... and I gave your side the advantage.

    Isn't the legality a question apart from the affont to the Constitution since laws change much more frequently than does the Constitution?

    In other words when women were having illegal abortions, I didn't hear people screaming too much about the Constitutional rights of the aborted children-- and I still don't.

    Really, I'm not as dumb as you think I am; I'm just asking a direct question that allows for a direct answer-- implications aside! :D
     
  17. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    Never said you were dumb. Misguided? welll...

    ;)
     
  18. giddyup

    giddyup Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,466
    Likes Received:
    488
    Do you see what I'm driving at?

    BTW, I think you guys are over-doing the "traitor" thing. There is only a couple in here who pull out that card. You make it seem like all the loyal opposition do it. Just my .02. Further evidence that T_J is winning... :D
     
  19. Sishir Chang

    Sishir Chang Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    11,064
    Likes Received:
    8
    Giddyup;

    I think I understand what you are trying for but the problem is the wording of your poll.

    You say
    vs.

    Of course the first choice is a bigger affront since you've stated its illegal whereas the other one is Legal

    The Constitution isn't a person with feelings but a legal document. As the document establishing our court and law enforcement of course what is illegal is more of an affront than what isn't.
     
  20. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    Point taken

    But as TJ would say "conservatives! Police your own!"
     

Share This Page