Texas Senate passes Constitutional Carry Bill..Heads back to House.

8,143 Views | 165 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by quash
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
curtpenn said:

Sam Lowry said:

curtpenn said:

Sam Lowry said:

curtpenn said:

Sam Lowry said:

curtpenn said:

Booray said:

curtpenn said:

Booray said:

curtpenn said:

Booray said:

Carlos Cruz said:

Booray said:

Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

Why are you so afraid of people voting?
Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

BTW, you are unhinged.


I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

https://catholicexchange.com/121409
Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.
Florda_mike
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Porteroso said:

Rawhide said:

Booray said:

Rawhide said:

Booray said:

Rawhide said:

Booray said:

Rawhide said:

Oldbear83 said:

Booray said:

Rawhide said:

Booray said:

Friscobear said:

Booray said:

How do you square the idea that "getting a LTC is just too time consuming to bother with so lets not worry about it" with "if you want to vote you should make time to get the proper ID and get registered?"
Those two things are not even close in difficulty.

If something is important to you, you'll find the time to do it.


The point of the legislation is to make it do one has to spend zero dollars and spend zero time to qualify to carry. Let's apply the same standard to voting.
I have no problem with that. Last time I checked, you need a state issued ID to purchase a firearm. Same standard should apply to voting

And I have no problem with that. As long as we make those state issued IDs easy to obtain. Which we don't do.
Very easy to obtain, actually.
No kidding. Here are the steps to procure a Texas State ID:

[ol]
  • Complete the identification card application
  • Make an appointment at a driver license office.
  • Provide the following documentation to the license and permit specialist:
    [ol]
  • Application
  • U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence
  • Texas Residency
  • Identity, and
  • Social Security Number
  • [/ol]
  • Provide your thumbprints.
  • Have your picture taken.
  • Pay the application
  • [/ol]
    Booray thinks that's difficult?

    Maybe if people could just purchase an ID from amazon.com and have it delivered to them in 2 days, that would make him happy.



    My wife has an employee that needed to do this. First appointment at the driver's license office was 7 weeks in the future.

    Have you ever tried to conduct business in person at a Texas Driver's License office? They are incredibly inefficient, open limited hours and in West Texas can be an hour or more to get to.

    So on paper it looks simple. For many hourly workers without regular transportation it is a big obstacle.

    The GOP knows this and is using it to make it difficult to qualify to vote. It is a disgusting tactic.

    If you will open the offices on Saturday, one night a week and contract to have substations at the local Walmart in underserved counties, I have no problem with voter ID. But you won't because this has zero to do with vote fraud. It has everything to do with keeping turnout low at all costs.
    I have no problems with open Saturdays and extra locations. You libs want to stop the wall, open the border and allow illegal aliens to waltz right so they can vote for democrats candidates. It's all about getting more votes (even illegitimate) with no concern for the integrity of our elections.

    The dnc talking point of the GOP trying to keep black people from voting is pure hogwash and you know it.
    Actually it is a GOP talking point:

    https://www.kaporcenter.org/florida-gop-leaders-admit-voter-suppression-was-motive-behind-voter-laws/

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/supreme-court-gop-attorney-defends-voting-restrictions-saying-they-help-n1259305

    https://washingtonmonthly.com/2021/03/26/no-more-pretending-republicans-admit-vote-restrictions-are-all-about-winning/

    https://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-audio-trump-adviser-republicans-rely-voter-suppression-justin-clark-2019-12

    https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2021/03/02/arizona-gop-lawyer-admits-real-reason-wants-election-reform/6895380002/

    I could post twenty more, but you get the point. Its not a secret-the GOP wants to suppress turnout because suppression helps it win. That is uncomfortable for you to admit but it is the absolute truth as evidenced by GOP strategists and lawyers saying that exact thing over and over.
    Opinion pieces with speculation and taking what was said out of context.

    The truth is that the democrats want to make it easy to cast illegal votes. They have zero concern for the integrity of our elections.

    I won't bother to post links to various articles or opinion pieces where a democrat admitted to committing voter fraud.
    One of those quotes was from an argument made at The Supreme Court. You can't admit the truth of what these people said because it is immoral and it makes your argument immoral.

    So you say "out of context" and "it was mentioned in an opinion piece" like that somehow changes the meaning of the words that GOP strategists and lawyers used. Straight up denial of the facts, jus like the straight up denial that millions more American citizens eligible and registered to vote cast their ballots for Joe Biden over Donald Trump.

    Pathetic that the GOP has become a party of fantasists.


    the democrats have become a party of nothing more than a mob made up unhinged anti-american communists that believe America is the worst country in the world, responsible for all of mankind's ills.

    democrats care nothing about the people they took an oath to serve. They only care about power and money and power.

    The stooges on the left are nothing more than their pawns.

    This is as close to admitting you are wrong as you ever get I think. When all reason fails, fall back on calling half the country evil.


    Luciferians

    You've earned it
    Osodecentx
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Con Carry is going to pass

    Two stacked conference committees cannot fail
    curtpenn
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    curtpenn
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Florda_mike said:

    Porteroso said:

    Rawhide said:

    Booray said:

    Rawhide said:

    Booray said:

    Rawhide said:

    Booray said:

    Rawhide said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    Booray said:

    Rawhide said:

    Booray said:

    Friscobear said:

    Booray said:

    How do you square the idea that "getting a LTC is just too time consuming to bother with so lets not worry about it" with "if you want to vote you should make time to get the proper ID and get registered?"
    Those two things are not even close in difficulty.

    If something is important to you, you'll find the time to do it.


    The point of the legislation is to make it do one has to spend zero dollars and spend zero time to qualify to carry. Let's apply the same standard to voting.
    I have no problem with that. Last time I checked, you need a state issued ID to purchase a firearm. Same standard should apply to voting

    And I have no problem with that. As long as we make those state issued IDs easy to obtain. Which we don't do.
    Very easy to obtain, actually.
    No kidding. Here are the steps to procure a Texas State ID:

    [ol]
  • Complete the identification card application
  • Make an appointment at a driver license office.
  • Provide the following documentation to the license and permit specialist:
    [ol]
  • Application
  • U.S. Citizenship or, if you are not a U.S. Citizen, evidence of lawful presence
  • Texas Residency
  • Identity, and
  • Social Security Number
  • [/ol]
  • Provide your thumbprints.
  • Have your picture taken.
  • Pay the application
  • [/ol]
    Booray thinks that's difficult?

    Maybe if people could just purchase an ID from amazon.com and have it delivered to them in 2 days, that would make him happy.



    My wife has an employee that needed to do this. First appointment at the driver's license office was 7 weeks in the future.

    Have you ever tried to conduct business in person at a Texas Driver's License office? They are incredibly inefficient, open limited hours and in West Texas can be an hour or more to get to.

    So on paper it looks simple. For many hourly workers without regular transportation it is a big obstacle.

    The GOP knows this and is using it to make it difficult to qualify to vote. It is a disgusting tactic.

    If you will open the offices on Saturday, one night a week and contract to have substations at the local Walmart in underserved counties, I have no problem with voter ID. But you won't because this has zero to do with vote fraud. It has everything to do with keeping turnout low at all costs.
    I have no problems with open Saturdays and extra locations. You libs want to stop the wall, open the border and allow illegal aliens to waltz right so they can vote for democrats candidates. It's all about getting more votes (even illegitimate) with no concern for the integrity of our elections.

    The dnc talking point of the GOP trying to keep black people from voting is pure hogwash and you know it.
    Actually it is a GOP talking point:

    https://www.kaporcenter.org/florida-gop-leaders-admit-voter-suppression-was-motive-behind-voter-laws/

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/supreme-court-gop-attorney-defends-voting-restrictions-saying-they-help-n1259305

    https://washingtonmonthly.com/2021/03/26/no-more-pretending-republicans-admit-vote-restrictions-are-all-about-winning/

    https://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-audio-trump-adviser-republicans-rely-voter-suppression-justin-clark-2019-12

    https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/laurieroberts/2021/03/02/arizona-gop-lawyer-admits-real-reason-wants-election-reform/6895380002/

    I could post twenty more, but you get the point. Its not a secret-the GOP wants to suppress turnout because suppression helps it win. That is uncomfortable for you to admit but it is the absolute truth as evidenced by GOP strategists and lawyers saying that exact thing over and over.
    Opinion pieces with speculation and taking what was said out of context.

    The truth is that the democrats want to make it easy to cast illegal votes. They have zero concern for the integrity of our elections.

    I won't bother to post links to various articles or opinion pieces where a democrat admitted to committing voter fraud.
    One of those quotes was from an argument made at The Supreme Court. You can't admit the truth of what these people said because it is immoral and it makes your argument immoral.

    So you say "out of context" and "it was mentioned in an opinion piece" like that somehow changes the meaning of the words that GOP strategists and lawyers used. Straight up denial of the facts, jus like the straight up denial that millions more American citizens eligible and registered to vote cast their ballots for Joe Biden over Donald Trump.

    Pathetic that the GOP has become a party of fantasists.


    the democrats have become a party of nothing more than a mob made up unhinged anti-american communists that believe America is the worst country in the world, responsible for all of mankind's ills.

    democrats care nothing about the people they took an oath to serve. They only care about power and money and power.

    The stooges on the left are nothing more than their pawns.

    This is as close to admitting you are wrong as you ever get I think. When all reason fails, fall back on calling half the country evil.


    Luciferians

    You've earned it


    Half the country is clearly either evil or stupid. There it is.
    Wrecks Quan Dough
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    Yep. Society gets the laws it wants.
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    curtpenn
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Wrecks Quan Dough
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Beckett: England is a ship. The king is it's Captain.

    King Henry: That is neat, Thomas.
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Carlos Cruz said:

    Beckett: England is a ship. The king is it's Captain.

    King Henry: That is neat, Thomas.
    Always count on Republicans to champion religion, the rule of law, and the great men of Western civilization.
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.
    Wrecks Quan Dough
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Beckett: England is a ship. The king is it's Captain.

    King Henry: That is neat, Thomas.
    Always count on Republicans to champion religion, the rule of law, and the great men of Western civilization.


    And great actors like Otoole and Burton.
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Carlos Cruz said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Beckett: England is a ship. The king is it's Captain.

    King Henry: That is neat, Thomas.
    Always count on Republicans to champion religion, the rule of law, and the great men of Western civilization.


    And great actors.
    Home Alone 2 doesn't count.
    Wrecks Quan Dough
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Beckett: England is a ship. The king is it's Captain.

    King Henry: That is neat, Thomas.
    Always count on Republicans to champion religion, the rule of law, and the great men of Western civilization.


    And great actors.
    Home Alone 2 doesn't count.


    Haven't seen that one. I have seen Beckett.
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Carlos Cruz said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Beckett: England is a ship. The king is it's Captain.

    King Henry: That is neat, Thomas.
    Always count on Republicans to champion religion, the rule of law, and the great men of Western civilization.


    And great actors.
    Home Alone 2 doesn't count.


    Haven't seen that one. I have seen Beckett.
    Catch it while you can. The crybullies are up in arms.
    curtpenn
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.


    I'm pretty much there now. Won't presume to speak for others. Each person must decide for themselves.
    Canon
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.


    Was the revolutionary war justified in your view?
    quash
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.


    Beats tooth and claw.

    What you advocate for in cultural hegemony is boring. And illiberal. Respect for personal rights means when you see someone doing something you don't like you just keep walking. You don't call the cops

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
    Canon
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Canon said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.


    Was the revolutionary war justified in your view?


    Sam?
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Canon said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.


    Was the revolutionary war justified in your view?
    Probably not.
    Canon
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    Canon said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.


    Was the revolutionary war justified in your view?
    Probably not.


    Well, that scotches the validity of your opinion on a host of other topics, then. Thanks for sharing.
    Sam Lowry
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Canon said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    Canon said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.


    Was the revolutionary war justified in your view?
    Probably not.


    Well, that scotches the validity of your opinion on a host of other topics, then. Thanks for sharing.
    Thank you for venting! All emotions are valid and none are judged.
    curtpenn
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    quash said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.


    Beats tooth and claw.

    What you advocate for in cultural hegemony is boring. And illiberal. Respect for personal rights means when you see someone doing something you don't like you just keep walking. You don't call the cops


    Would have thought a libertarian such as you could appreciate freedom. Basically, I just prefer governments that do as little as possible and steal as little of our assets and income as possible.

    As to "beats tooth and claw"; yes, until it doesn't.
    Canon
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Sam Lowry said:

    Canon said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    Canon said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.
    And when you've lost the culture, what protects you?
    Guns and/or force of arms and the willingness to use them. Mao was correct in that political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
    I highly recommend an examination of Catholic teaching on this point.

    https://catholicexchange.com/121409
    Thanks for the link. There's a reason I'm not Roman Catholic; several actually. I cannot agree with the teachings espoused in this article.
    You're welcome. I understand that culture is central. But if culture is the garden, law is the fence around it. It's not an easy fence to build. If it's damaged, you repair it. You don't tear it down when the garden dies.


    Culture isn't the garden; culture is the wall/fence around the society that is the garden. Law is just codified consensus that is mutable.
    There's a reason our words for culture, agriculture, and cult all have the same root. It is the garden, and it is first and foremost the church's job to tend it. Nothing the state is doing now prevents us from doing our job. If the culture fails, the failure is ours.
    From the Latin colere - to tend or grow, thence to French culture. The tending and growing (cultivating) is accomplished by the gardeners/cultivators informed by their culture. The resulting society is the crop. It would be best if the state were not an antagonist. We are all culpable for failures of culture and governance.
    Serious question for you. How unfriendly does the state have to be before Christians are justified in rebelling? Is there any state in the world today that is Christian enough to merit loyalty? I'm not looking for a list of grievances against the left - I already have one of my own, and it's lengthy. I want to know the principle involved.


    Was the revolutionary war justified in your view?
    Probably not.


    Well, that scotches the validity of your opinion on a host of other topics, then. Thanks for sharing.
    Thank you for venting! All emotions are valid and none are judged.


    Oh, you feel attacked and are projecting. That's cute.

    quash
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    curtpenn said:

    quash said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.


    Beats tooth and claw.

    What you advocate for in cultural hegemony is boring. And illiberal. Respect for personal rights means when you see someone doing something you don't like you just keep walking. You don't call the cops


    Would have thought a libertarian such as you could appreciate freedom. Basically, I just prefer governments that do as little as possible and steal as little of our assets and income as possible.

    As to "beats tooth and claw"; yes, until it doesn't.
    Freedom is exactly what I'm talking about. The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't.
    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
    Oldbear83
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
    quash
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Oldbear83 said:

    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    There's a difference between a poorly functioning rue of law and a functioning one that does not do better than tooth and claw.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
    Oldbear83
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    There's a difference between a poorly functioning rue of law and a functioning one that does not do better than tooth and claw.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    Not what I said. Try reading again.
    That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
    quash
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    There's a difference between a poorly functioning rue of law and a functioning one that does not do better than tooth and claw.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    Not what I said. Try reading again.
    Finished.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
    curtpenn
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    quash said:

    curtpenn said:

    quash said:

    curtpenn said:

    Sam Lowry said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    curtpenn said:

    Booray said:

    Carlos Cruz said:

    Booray said:

    Don't be disingenuous. The conversation is about how difficult and/or expensive it is to get a voting ID. The passport was suggested as an alternative to the driver's license/ID card process because DPS is difficult to access. Growl Towel makes the point that passports are more easily accessed. At a cost of $110.00. We are only having this discussion based on the use of the document as a voter ID so, yes the person would be paying $110.00 for a passport so he or she could vote. Should not have to do that.

    Again, I am fine with voter ID laws so long as those voter IDs are readily accessible, The answer to the issue is to either fund DPS to allow weekend and after work visits, make sure that someone with proper paperwork can get an ID on a drop-in basis in a reasonable time (say an hour) and make sure DPS offices are within a reasonable distance of all Texans. Where DPS cannot meet that criteria, empower another government entity or private entity that can.

    Of course, that answer is built on the assumption that those advocating for voter ID are actually concerned about vote fraud despite their inability to find it anywhere. We all know the assumption is incorrect-voter ID proponents are just trying to win elections by making it hard to vote.

    It is a despicable and anti-American tactic.
    The only thing that is dispicable and anti-American is thinking that someone cannot suffer a little expense and inconvenience to be able to vote. You think pretty little of both your fellow American and the voting franchise.
    We outlawed poll taxes a long time ago. And I think I made it clear I don't mind a "little inconvenience" but the system currently (at least in Texas) imposes more than that.

    Why are you so afraid of people voting?
    Simple; too many of them are idiots with no shared cultural values.
    Anyone who doesn't share you cultural values is an "idiot." Bet you are a ton of fun at parties.


    E Pluribus Unum is a thing to some of us. Couldn't care less what color you are or where you're from, but if you don't share my values and you threaten our freedoms you are the enemy. Anyone who supports the regressive agenda is a threat. That threat should be taken seriously.

    For the record, never been much of a party kind of guy. Full bore INTJ and content.
    What values must I share with you to escape being your enemy?

    BTW, you are unhinged.


    I am the opposite of unhinged; just able to take a critical look at things and draw logical conclusions and not afraid to voice an opinion. As to values, let's start with securing borders, rejecting identity politics, supporting limited government at all levels (particularly at the Federal level), vigorously support the 1st and 2nd amendments, require originalist judges, keep your hands off my money, and mind your own business. That'll do for a start.
    How are you going to enforce all of that without the rule of law? Once we're rid of those pesky elections, does the other side just give up and do everything our way?


    This is why culture is critically important. Rule of law is overrated.


    Beats tooth and claw.

    What you advocate for in cultural hegemony is boring. And illiberal. Respect for personal rights means when you see someone doing something you don't like you just keep walking. You don't call the cops


    Would have thought a libertarian such as you could appreciate freedom. Basically, I just prefer governments that do as little as possible and steal as little of our assets and income as possible.

    As to "beats tooth and claw"; yes, until it doesn't.
    Freedom is exactly what I'm talking about. The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't.
    Are you content with the current trajectory of our country? If not, can you help me understand what you would consider to be beyond your tolerance? What would resistance to the zeitgeist look like for you?

    I mostly just push back on various social media platforms, look for ways to trim my tax burden, and accumulate scary black rifles, magazines, and ammo for myself and my immediate tribe.
    Oldbear83
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    There's a difference between a poorly functioning rue of law and a functioning one that does not do better than tooth and claw.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    Not what I said. Try reading again.
    Finished.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    So you 'read' but made sure to ignore.

    That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
    Florda_mike
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    There's a difference between a poorly functioning rue of law and a functioning one that does not do better than tooth and claw.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    Not what I said. Try reading again.
    Finished.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    So you 'read' but made sure to ignore.




    Remember me someday

    I'm the one that tried to tell you these guys aren't logical and don't want what you're preaching
    quash
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    There's a difference between a poorly functioning rue of law and a functioning one that does not do better than tooth and claw.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    Not what I said. Try reading again.
    Finished.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    So you 'read' but made sure to ignore.


    Well, maybe you should read the thread. The poster I was dialoguing with said the rule of law was overrated. I asked if you felt the same way, too. Twice.

    And here we are with you dancing around the question. Here, I'll rephrase it for you:

    Do you also think the rule of law is overrated?
    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
    Oldbear83
    How long do you want to ignore this user?
    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash said:

    Oldbear83 said:

    quash: "The rule of law protects freedom better than tooth and claw. Tell me when it doesn't."

    Prior to 1964, minorities in the U.S. were better protected by the threat of force than by law.

    Just the first obvious example/
    There's a difference between a poorly functioning rue of law and a functioning one that does not do better than tooth and claw.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    Not what I said. Try reading again.
    Finished.

    Do you think the rule of law is overrated, too?
    So you 'read' but made sure to ignore.


    Well, maybe you should read the thread. The poster I was dialoguing with said the rule of law was overrated. I asked if you felt the same way, too. Twice.

    And here we are with you dancing around the question. Here, I'll rephrase it for you:

    Do you also think the rule of law is overrated?
    Quash, I notice you always refuse to defend your own position, and shimmy when anyone asks you a direct question.

    I made my position clear, and am disappointed to see you - once again - try to score points rather than have a substantive discussion.

    Law is valuable yes, but it is not absolute, and is historically used to oppress and protect injustice, as I observed. Like any tool, how it is used matters.
    That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
     
    ×
    subscribe Verify your student status
    See Subscription Benefits
    Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.