The Patriot Act Extended

[HeyYou]

My entire argument is that you should find out why a ruling was made, and if it was correct to be made. I am saying you should look into it and not just listen to the judges.

 

Why don't you try it? Read the judgments, rather than Wikipedia. I read the judgments in toto and am quite capable of understanding the reasoning of the judges, thank you very much, but just as HeyYou says, whether or not I agree with them is immaterial, we are stuck with them.

Thats like saying "Whether I agree with the drug laws or not, we are stuck with them so it does not matter."

 

I am saying you should read the rulings and decide for yourself if they are correct or not, if its law it doesn't matter in that context.

 

A lot of drugs are illegal, so that means we should agree with the law at all times?

 

So to be sure I am following you right, you are saying that because its law, it does not matter what anyone thinks about it?

 

Why does this topic even exist then? The patriot act was passed by congress and is ruled as constitutional, so clearly this topic needs to be deleted right?

 

Ok, so, you read the ruling, and decide it is wrong. Then what?

[marharth]

My entire argument is that you should find out why a ruling was made, and if it was correct to be made. I am saying you should look into it and not just listen to the judges.

 

Why don't you try it? Read the judgments, rather than Wikipedia. I read the judgments in toto and am quite capable of understanding the reasoning of the judges, thank you very much, but just as HeyYou says, whether or not I agree with them is immaterial, we are stuck with them.

Thats like saying "Whether I agree with the drug laws or not, we are stuck with them so it does not matter."

 

I am saying you should read the rulings and decide for yourself if they are correct or not, if its law it doesn't matter in that context.

 

A lot of drugs are illegal, so that means we should agree with the law at all times?

 

So to be sure I am following you right, you are saying that because its law, it does not matter what anyone thinks about it?

 

Why does this topic even exist then? The patriot act was passed by congress and is ruled as constitutional, so clearly this topic needs to be deleted right?

 

Ok, so, you read the ruling, and decide it is wrong. Then what?

The entire point of the debate section is to debate on the correctness of things.

 

If I read the ruling and decided it was wrong, then I would explain why I thought it was wrong here and see if others could prove me otherwise. Rather then just using the outcome of the ruling as the entire base for the argument.

[HeyYou]

My entire argument is that you should find out why a ruling was made, and if it was correct to be made. I am saying you should look into it and not just listen to the judges.

 

Why don't you try it? Read the judgments, rather than Wikipedia. I read the judgments in toto and am quite capable of understanding the reasoning of the judges, thank you very much, but just as HeyYou says, whether or not I agree with them is immaterial, we are stuck with them.

Thats like saying "Whether I agree with the drug laws or not, we are stuck with them so it does not matter."

 

I am saying you should read the rulings and decide for yourself if they are correct or not, if its law it doesn't matter in that context.

 

A lot of drugs are illegal, so that means we should agree with the law at all times?

 

So to be sure I am following you right, you are saying that because its law, it does not matter what anyone thinks about it?

 

Why does this topic even exist then? The patriot act was passed by congress and is ruled as constitutional, so clearly this topic needs to be deleted right?

 

Ok, so, you read the ruling, and decide it is wrong. Then what?

The entire point of the debate section is to debate on the correctness of things.

 

If I read the ruling and decided it was wrong, then I would explain why I thought it was wrong here and see if others could prove me otherwise. Rather then just using the outcome of the ruling as the entire base for the argument.

 

Ah, Ok. things come a bit more clearly now. :D

 

So, as to the topic at hand...... the Patriot Act..... (catchy name, eh?) It gave the government powers to ignore certain aspects of the bill of rights. The Supreme Court found it constitutional.... but I wholeheartedly disagree with that ruling. I see it as the government taking another not-so small step in eroding our rights, all in the name of National Security...... so, while we may get the impression that it makes us safer.... it makes us less free. And isn't freedom what this country was all about in the first place?? So much for that thought, eh?

[csgators]

And isn't freedom what this country was all about in the first place?? So much for that thought, eh?

 

Agreed. That's long gone at this point on many levels. :verymad:

[marharth]

My entire argument is that you should find out why a ruling was made, and if it was correct to be made. I am saying you should look into it and not just listen to the judges.

 

Why don't you try it? Read the judgments, rather than Wikipedia. I read the judgments in toto and am quite capable of understanding the reasoning of the judges, thank you very much, but just as HeyYou says, whether or not I agree with them is immaterial, we are stuck with them.

Thats like saying "Whether I agree with the drug laws or not, we are stuck with them so it does not matter."

 

I am saying you should read the rulings and decide for yourself if they are correct or not, if its law it doesn't matter in that context.

 

A lot of drugs are illegal, so that means we should agree with the law at all times?

 

So to be sure I am following you right, you are saying that because its law, it does not matter what anyone thinks about it?

 

Why does this topic even exist then? The patriot act was passed by congress and is ruled as constitutional, so clearly this topic needs to be deleted right?

 

Ok, so, you read the ruling, and decide it is wrong. Then what?

The entire point of the debate section is to debate on the correctness of things.

 

If I read the ruling and decided it was wrong, then I would explain why I thought it was wrong here and see if others could prove me otherwise. Rather then just using the outcome of the ruling as the entire base for the argument.

 

Ah, Ok. things come a bit more clearly now. :D

 

So, as to the topic at hand...... the Patriot Act..... (catchy name, eh?) It gave the government powers to ignore certain aspects of the bill of rights. The Supreme Court found it constitutional.... but I wholeheartedly disagree with that ruling. I see it as the government taking another not-so small step in eroding our rights, all in the name of National Security...... so, while we may get the impression that it makes us safer.... it makes us less free. And isn't freedom what this country was all about in the first place?? So much for that thought, eh?

That's what I have been trying to say for the last four pages.

[HeyYou]

My entire argument is that you should find out why a ruling was made, and if it was correct to be made. I am saying you should look into it and not just listen to the judges.

 

Why don't you try it? Read the judgments, rather than Wikipedia. I read the judgments in toto and am quite capable of understanding the reasoning of the judges, thank you very much, but just as HeyYou says, whether or not I agree with them is immaterial, we are stuck with them.

Thats like saying "Whether I agree with the drug laws or not, we are stuck with them so it does not matter."

 

I am saying you should read the rulings and decide for yourself if they are correct or not, if its law it doesn't matter in that context.

 

A lot of drugs are illegal, so that means we should agree with the law at all times?

 

So to be sure I am following you right, you are saying that because its law, it does not matter what anyone thinks about it?

 

Why does this topic even exist then? The patriot act was passed by congress and is ruled as constitutional, so clearly this topic needs to be deleted right?

 

Ok, so, you read the ruling, and decide it is wrong. Then what?

The entire point of the debate section is to debate on the correctness of things.

 

If I read the ruling and decided it was wrong, then I would explain why I thought it was wrong here and see if others could prove me otherwise. Rather then just using the outcome of the ruling as the entire base for the argument.

 

Ah, Ok. things come a bit more clearly now. :D

 

So, as to the topic at hand...... the Patriot Act..... (catchy name, eh?) It gave the government powers to ignore certain aspects of the bill of rights. The Supreme Court found it constitutional.... but I wholeheartedly disagree with that ruling. I see it as the government taking another not-so small step in eroding our rights, all in the name of National Security...... so, while we may get the impression that it makes us safer.... it makes us less free. And isn't freedom what this country was all about in the first place?? So much for that thought, eh?

That's what I have been trying to say for the last four pages.

 

You needed to be a bit more specific. For the most part, the rest of us were dealing in generalities, not the specifics of this particular forum.

[ginnyfizz]

If I read the ruling and decided it was wrong, then I would explain why I thought it was wrong here and see if others could prove me otherwise. Rather then just using the outcome of the ruling as the entire base for the argument.

 

IF you read the ruling...I guess that means you haven't then? Believe me, you would soon lose concentration if I did a detailed dissection of the relevant Supreme Court judgment. As it happens, I personally agree with HeyYou about the effects of the Patriot Act when he says;-

 

"I see it as the government taking another not-so small step in eroding our rights, all in the name of National Security...... so, while we may get the impression that it makes us safer.... it makes us less free. And isn't freedom what this country was all about in the first place?? So much for that thought, eh?"

 

It does not alter the fact that, unfortunately, it is the law and has been upheld by the US Supreme Court. Nor does it excuse your belittling tactics.

[marharth]

If I read the ruling and decided it was wrong, then I would explain why I thought it was wrong here and see if others could prove me otherwise. Rather then just using the outcome of the ruling as the entire base for the argument.

 

IF you read the ruling...I guess that means you haven't then? Believe me, you would soon lose concentration if I did a detailed dissection of the relevant Supreme Court judgment. As it happens, I personally agree with HeyYou about the effects of the Patriot Act when he says;-

 

"I see it as the government taking another not-so small step in eroding our rights, all in the name of National Security...... so, while we may get the impression that it makes us safer.... it makes us less free. And isn't freedom what this country was all about in the first place?? So much for that thought, eh?"

 

It does not alter the fact that, unfortunately, it is the law and has been upheld by the US Supreme Court. Nor does it excuse your belittling tactics.

I wasn't referring to any single ruling, it was a hypothetical statement.

 

I know it is law, and it is upheld by the supreme court. I have known that since I joined the forum. I still don't see what that has to do with making your own decisions on the rulings.

 

I agree with HeyYou as well, but I don't quite understand what your point is. Are you saying its law so it doesn't matter what what we think?

[RZ1029]

That's pretty much the truth. It's law, get used to it and get over it.

 

Go to law school and do something useful if you have a problem with it.

[marharth]

That's pretty much the truth. It's law, get used to it and get over it.

 

Go to law school and do something useful if you have a problem with it.

You realize that statement makes no sense right?

 

Most of the topics in the debate section are about laws, why are you commonly in this section if you really believe that?

 

If you really think people should "get over it" then why are you here?