CreateDebate


Debate Info

11
79
The LIBS, of course Right wingers
Debate Score:90
Arguments:40
Total Votes:101
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 The LIBS, of course (10)
 
 Right wingers (30)

Debate Creator

excon(18260) pic



Do libs want a STRICT interpretation of the Constitution, or is it the Right wing??

Hello:

If you've paid attention to these pages recently, you'll see that poochy boy and I have had a discussion about the actual wording of the 5th Amendment..  I say the 5th applies to "PERSONS", and poochy boy says it doesn't..  

When you read the actual WORDS, the meaning is CLEAR..   Yet, not to right wingers..  What's up with that??

excon

The LIBS, of course

Side Score: 11
VS.

Right wingers

Side Score: 79
No arguments found. Add one!

The Liberal position on the Constitution is that it is outdated and needs to be put through the shredder because "that's who we are"... and it says something about a creator, and...something about feelings and words hurt...

Side: Right wingers
excon(18260) Disputed
2 points

The Liberal position on the Constitution is that it is outdated and needs to be put through the shredder

Hello bront:

I'm a lib.. I LOVE the Constitution... Looks to me that your FAILURE to address your MISREADING of the 5th Amendment, means that YOU wanna shitcan the Constitution - NOT the libs...

DUDE!!!

excon

Side: The LIBS, of course
5 points

Riiiiight...I remember not mentioning the 5th Amendment while I was busy not mentioning the 5th Amendment.

Side: Right wingers
5 points

We know, we know Con. The liberal version of the Constitution and the law is try to wiggle around it when it is in the way, invoke it when it fits the narrative, and burn it when it obstructs the liberal version of "how things should be because of my feelings".

Side: Right wingers
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Explain ur point u IRRELEVANT FOOL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side: Right wingers
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

SUPER STUPID none other than the Regressives want to shitcan the Constitution !!

UR STUPIDITY is all u KNOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side: Right wingers
1 point

Historically it is Conservatives who want strict interpretation of the Constitution. It is the Right that seeks original intent interpretations while the Left looks to penumbras and emanations.

As it concerns the current topic, this general rule is unchanged. As an example, when then-governer Mike Pence enacted a law denying services to Syrians, an appellate court upheld a decision to strike down the law on the basis that it descriminated against a national origin, a breach of non-citizens 14th Amendment Rights.

The the Constitution does apply to non-citizens, it should not be construed as applying to those outside of its jurisdiction.

Side: Right wingers
1 point

When an original-intent interpretation is utilized by the Supreme Court, the left cries out against a Nazi takeover while the Right cheers.

Side: Right wingers
excon(18260) Disputed
1 point

Historically

Hello A:

I'm confused.. Your use of the word "historically", indicates that they no longer think that way.. Clearly, our resident right wingers don't think that way either.. Both bront and poochy boy believe illegal aliens aren't entitled to due process of law.. My guess is they BELIEVE their position IS the framers intent.. I wonder just how many right wingers AGREE with them..

excon

Side: The LIBS, of course
Amarel(5669) Disputed
1 point

I used “historically” to indicate that experience supports my position. Whatever a few site users think, the right cheered and the left wailed at the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice expected to interpret from original intent.

Side: Right wingers
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

Confusion is surprising to the CONFUSED ?????????????????????????

Side: Right wingers
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Quote where within the 5th Amendment it states Due Process for Illegal Aliens !

Side: Right wingers
1 point

The conservative position on the Constitution is that it should be based on a Biblical agenda, which would be totally AGAINST a Constitution that is based on freedom of religion. NOTHING is more "strict" than a religious doctrine from a single religion., so, it IS the right wing.

Liberals want ALL religions, as well as non-religious people … WE, the people, …. to have equal rights. NOT very strict! (Just Constitutionally correct!)

Side: Right wingers
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

AL where is the Biblical Agenda in the 5th Amendment !

Side: The LIBS, of course
1 point

"….it says something about a creator." Exactly! Not what a particular religion considers a "creator", but what ANYONE considers his/her creator. NOWHERE does the Constitution mention the "Christian" version, it very carefully steps around THAT, and, again, leaves it up to WE, the people … not YOU the Christians. The only "god" mentioned is the "natural god", again avoiding the Christian version.

The last thing this lib wants is to shred the Constitution, and I'm not alone!

Side: Right wingers
outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Quote it AL in the 5th Amendment and complete the proof you are CRAZY !!!!!!!!!!

Side: The LIBS, of course
1 point

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Trying to apply the above to your Open Borders argument shows just how insane you are.

Side: Right wingers
1 point

Preamble

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

James Madison

Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison advocating a Bill of Rights: "Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can."

First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petitition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Second Amendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Third Amendment

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner; nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.

ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

James Madison

Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison advocating a Bill of Rights: "Half a loaf is better than no bread. If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can."

First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petitition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Second Amendment

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Third Amendment

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner; nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Fourth Amendment

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Fifth Amendment

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

Sixth Amendment

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

Seventh Amendment

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of common law.

Eighth Amendment

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Ninth Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

What u want to talk about SUPER STUPID ????????? LMAO

https://www.aclu.org/united-states-bill-rights-first-10-amendments-constitution

Side: Right wingers
1 point

Hello:

If you've paid attention to these pages recently, you'll see that poochy boy and I have had a discussion about the actual wording of the 5th Amendment.. I say the 5th applies to "PERSONS", and poochy boy says it doesn't..

When you read the actual WORDS, the meaning is CLEAR.. Yet, not to right wingers.. What's up with that??

excon

Let's talk about WORDS !!!!!!!!!!

The 1st Amendment refers to RELIGION that meaning is CLEAR !

The 2nd Amendment refers to GUNS that meaning is CLEAR !

The 3rd Amendment refers to SOLDIERS that meaning is CLEAR !

The 4th Amendment refers to PEOPLE that meaning is CLEAR !

What do the CONFUSED know about WORDS! CON that is a question only you can explain

Side: Right wingers
1 point

According to CON only 2 Amendments exist that would be the 5th Amendment and the 14th Amendment !!!!!!!!!! DENY it Dummy i dare you tooooooooooo !!!!!

Side: Right wingers