Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Idiot Freeper chain letter I received

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:31 PM
Original message
Idiot Freeper chain letter I received
I am thinking of responding back but haven't done so yet. My answers are labeled under each idiot Article.



NEW PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION

Somebody said this was probably the best e-mail he'd seen in a long, long time. The following has been attributed to State Rep Mitchell Aye from Georgia. This guy should run for President one day...

"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."


ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.


My answer: Who ever claimed they had the right to all this stuff? The problem is over stated.


ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.

My answer: Of course but everyone should work toward being kind, respectful and sensitive to other peoples feelings and beliefs. For instance, is it OK for Michael Richards to verbally abuse Black people???

ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.


My answer: If you stuck a screwdriver in your eye, you would not have much of a case.

ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes. (This one is my pet peeve...get an education and go to work....don't expect everyone else to take care of you!)


My answer: The biggest problem in the country is welfare for the wealthy. CEO's making 400 times what the average worker makes and guys like Ken Lay steeling from average folks. The middle class is growing smaller and smaller and the wealthy are finding more and more tax loop holes. Thats why you didn't see Jesus hanging out with the rich and powerful. He stood up for the common man.


ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.

My Answer:

Any health care is going to have a cost but what is the best value for everyone? The United States is falling behind most of the other industrialized nations when it comes to the health of our population. We even come in behind Cuba for infant mortality. The problem is when poor people can't afford health care, they put off going to the doctor and little problem turns into a big problem and they often end up dying. Guess who gets stuck with the HUGE bill when they are rushed to the hospital? You and I.


ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.

My answer: Is there really a problem here? Isn't that the way the law already works?

ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

My answer: Again, the current system already covers this???

ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

(AMEN!) (AMEN, AGAIN)

My Answer: Again, the current system already works this way. Who ever claimed someone had the right to a job????

ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

My Answer: There is nothing wrong with trying to make life easier for everyone.

ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (lastly....)

My Answer: I would use a different tone here but I agree people should try to learn English. It's not something I lose too much sleep over though. Who cares?

ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!!!!

My Answer: No it wasn't. The constitution is neutral when it comes to religion that is why God is not mentioned any place in the constitution. The founders had a variety of religious beliefs and Thomas Jefferson even re-wrote the Bible and took out all the miracles because he believed in the laws of nature which he believed God may or may not have installed. Our constitution is founded on freedom of religion, the pursuit of knowledge, the bill or rights, human reason and free debate, period. Jesus doesn't play a roll. The founders were also not too big on miracles. If you read the Declaration of Independence you will notice the term "God and Natures God" This is a deistic term referring to the laws of nature. Gravity, electricity, etc. etc. They felt the best way to know God was to observe his/her creation and how it worked.

Jefferson's Syllabus of an Estimate of the
Merit of the Doctrines of Jesus,
Compared with Those of Others.
In a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush, Jefferson described his views on Jesus and the Christian religion, as well as his own religious beliefs. He appended to this description a Syllabus that compared the teachings of Jesus to those of the earlier Greek and Roman philosophers, and to the religion of the Jews of Jesus' time. This letter and the appended Syllabus are interesting to anyone studying the Jefferson Bible because they explain precisely Jefferson's views which later led him to make the compilation of the moral philosophy of Jesus in the form presented on this website. Both the letter and the Syllabus are presented below, and may be found in the Memorial Edition of Jefferson's Writings, Vol. 10, pg. 379. Following the syllabus is a letter to William Short, which contains further discussion of the syllabus. This letter is found in Vol. 11 of the Memorial Edition, pg. 243.

Letter To Dr. Benjamin Rush.
Washington, April 21, 1803.
DEAR SIR,
In some of the delightful conversations with you in the evenings of 1798-99, and which served as an anodyne to the afflictions of the crisis through which our country was then laboring, the Christian religion was sometimes our topic; and I then promised you that one day or other I would give you my views of it. They are the result of a life of inquiry and reflection, and very different from that anti-Christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed opposed, but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others, ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never claimed any other. At the short interval since these conversations, when I could justifiably abstract my mind from public affairs, the subject has been under my contemplation. But the more I considered it, the more it expanded beyond the measure of either my time or information. In the moment of my late departure from Monticello, I received from Dr. Priestley his little treatise of "Socrates and Jesus Compared." This being a section of the general view I had taken of the field, it became a subject of reflection while on the road and unoccupied otherwise. The result was, to arrange in my mind a syllabus or outline of such an estimate of the comparative merits of Christianity as I wished to see executed by someone of more leisure and information for the task than myself. This I now send you as the only discharge of my promise I can probably ever execute. And in confiding it to you, I know it will not be exposed to the malignant perversions of those who make every word from me a text for new misrepresentations and calumnies. I am moreover averse to the communication of my religious tenets to the public, because it would countenance the presumption of those who have endeavored to draw them before that tribunal, and to seduce public opinion to erect itself into that inquisition over the rights of conscience which the laws have so justly proscribed. It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others; or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own. It behooves him, too, in his own case, to give no example of concession, betraying the common right of independent opinion, by answering questions of faith which the laws have left between God and himself. Accept my affectionate salutations.
Th: Jefferson

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. They have such a warped view of us and the world around them
It's f*cking pathetic to a point...after that point just pathetically f*cked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindPilot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. I would respond with something like...
A right to all kinds of stuff and wealth, housing and healthcare? Educational and employment opportunities abound? I can get away with rape, murder and kidnapping scot-free? The government will take money & property from you so I can be happy? And all I have to do is speak English and not be bothered by god on the money?

Where is this place? I want to move there!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosemary2205 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Already debunked.
Edited on Wed Jan-24-07 03:43 PM by Rosemary2205
http://www.snopes.com/language/document/norights.htm

Though for it's content - targeting those who appearantly think the world owes them a living - I, like you, question just WHO they are talking to. But it being written by a libertarian would suggest it's intended for anyone who requires any government services whatsoever.

You might ask the sender, what government services they use and why do they think they deserve to be subsidized in those needs?

Like a fire dept, or a library, or a public school, or roads?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MindPilot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. to those who complain about welfare
the "I don't want to pay for some lazy <insert racial slur here> to sit around all day and do drugs/have kids/watch TV..." line. Always elicits this response from me:

"If it's such a good deal, why are YOU working?" Shuts 'em up every time.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pdrichards114 Donating Member (215 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm so sick of freeper's state of mind.
Everything is black or white. Positive or negative.

My grandmother(rest her soul) told me like it or not, everything issue in this world is in shades of gray.

When I was young it made no sense, but then again as a teenager I knew everything.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes. Best line out of Star Wars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0rganism Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. shows fundamental misunderstandings of the Constitution's purpose & structure
Edited on Wed Jan-24-07 03:46 PM by 0rganism
Every article and amendment of the U.S. Constitution is aimed at defining and limiting GOVERNMENT, not the individual person. The role of statutes and caselaw may extend to limiting individual behavior, but that is hardly the role of a document as broad and august as the Constitution. If this pile of low-quality crapola can be honestly attributed to an elected GOP asshat in the House, our nation is the poorer for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
6. If Article II also applied to Christians, Confederate sympathizers, those who squeal like stuck pig
at any political statement to the left of Ann Coulter, and are offended by the very existence of gays, then I would favor it.

They are not against being offended, merely against OTHER people being offended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
8. translation of ARTICLE X: foreign language frighten Grog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. Tell him you agree with Article VII and think it should be applied to corporations and pols who
steal who countries to give them to their corporate friends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aristus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 03:58 PM
Response to Original message
10. Did you notice the spew-monkey bashing public housing?
Hey, the President lives in public housing, on the tax-payers dime; but his place looks pretty darn good because of the money budgeted for it. It isn't public housing, per se, that's the problem; it's the lack of proper funding for same. Same goes for public health.



F*****g idiot. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Cleaner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
11. Oh man, did you have to post this? My blood pressure is WAY up. I need some water.
You addressed it pretty good but one thing I can say is that who the hell are they to call people who have big screen TVs, etc. liberal.

Down here in Dallas it's pretty materialistic and many religious programs teach you to be wealthy. Oh I see if it's using God for material gain its OK but buying it on your own is "liberal."

i could go on but why bother? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OxQQme Donating Member (694 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Here's another received e-mail
that had some funny and some sad image of a possible future.
Wondering what some of y'alls feelings are about this.



In The Year 2029

Ozone created by electric cars now killing millions in the seventh largest country in the world, Mexifornia, formerly known as California . White minorities still trying to have English recognized as Mexifornia's third language.

Spotted Owl plague threatens northwestern United States crops and livestock.

Baby conceived naturally. Scientists stumped.

Couple petitions court to reinstate heterosexual marriage.

Last remaining Fundamentalist Muslim dies in the AmericanTerritory of the Middle East (formerly known as Iraq ,Afghanistan , Syria and Lebanon).

Iran still closed off; physicists estimate it will take at least
10 more years before radioactivity decreases to safe levels.

France pleads for global help after being taken over by Jamaica.


Castro finally dies at age 112; Cuban cigars can now be imported legally, but President Chelsea Clinton has banned all smoking.

George Z. Bush says he will run for President in 2036.

Postal Service raises price of first class stamp to $17.89 and reduces mail delivery to Wednesdays only.

85-year $75.8 billion government funded study: Diet and Exercise is the key to weight loss.

Average weight of Americans drops to 250 lbs.

Japanese scientists have created a camera with such a fast shutter speed, they now can photograph a woman with her mouth shut.

Massachusetts executes last remaining conservative.

Supreme Court rules punishment of criminals violates their civil rights.

Average height of NBA players is now nine feet, seven inches.

New federal law requires that all nail clippers, screwdrivers, fly swatters and rolled-up newspapers must be registered by January
2036.

Congress authorizes direct deposit of formerly illegal political contributions to campaign accounts.

IRS sets lowest tax rate at 75 percent.

Florida voters still having trouble with voting machines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlCzervik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
13. "Idiot Freeper" redundant--yes?
Edited on Wed Jan-24-07 04:46 PM by chimpsrsmarter
your response is far too intelligent for that sender to understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoGOPZone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-24-07 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
14. Article II conflicts with Article X
If there's no right to never be offended then there should be no problem with people speaking a language different from English.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC