I have no issue with hunting for food. I have an issue with hunting for sport. And big game hunting. Those people are no better than poachers I read an article the other day where this man hunting an elephant was killed by the elephant and the only thing I would wish for is that fucker's head is mounted on that Elephant's wall.
I thought about you and your sister when I mentioned gay and trans, much respect to you and she,.. I used "acknowledge their rights" because I'm not really interested in hearing about group agendas, just like I'm not interested in Antifa's, nor Kaepernick's, nor PETA's for that matter,.. no offense meant, I'm just much more concerned about individual's rights, sorry to sound like a dick about this,.. every person deserves to be treated with utmost respect. Let every one use male restrooms, guys don't care,.. most girls care, respect their rights too. I totally demand protection for every religious belief, though not all religious practices. Term limits sound good, but have drawbacks. The right's of the majority don't need protection, the right's of minorities do.
"The right's of the majority don't need protection, the right's of minorities do." Really? So it's OK to discriminate against the majority in favor of the minority? Tyrrany of the minority, read Thomas Soule
I believe in limited federal government. The constitution is set to provide a balance between federal powers and state & individual rights. A great portion of the document is to apportion and limit the power of the federal government. Likewise the first 10 amendments are expressly there to protect the individual from an overbearing government. That being said it's not the same as it was in 1789. We're much more complex and connected now and that requires more concentration in federal hands. However we must keep in mind that bureaucracies tend to grow organically and it is imperative that their growth be held down as much as required. Finally we are a constitutional republic NOT a democracy. We elect our representatives to act for us. They must perform with a delicate balance. They must follow our desires but not be automatons and only vote as we want. They must have the judgment to know when to and the courage to go against the will of their constituents when necessary. I don't like the idea of term limits as that limits the voters' right to choose. As I noted the first 10 amendments and many of those that followed are there to protect individuals from the government. However NO right is absolute. We have a long record of limits being placed on speech, the right to bear arms, and every amendment. Likewise non enumerated rights such as the right to privacy MUST have limits. I believe states rights and that they are a critical counter balance to federal centralization. 50 states each with their own unique character and way of serving their constituents provides a fertile ground for development and growth. We should celebrate the differences in each state and not try to force uniformity. Again it's not the same as it was in 1789 and we need to continually adjust to meet the times. As so many from Ben Franklin on have told us individual responsibility of the citizens to maintain the republic. We are NOT a Christian nation. Yes our founding fathers were basically Christians and much of the society the provided the foundation was christian but the whole of the colonies were founded by people fleeing state mandated religion. We were, are and should be a secular state. I know this is different than most have posted but I make my political decisions based the principles I listed above. I believe that by following principles we can make better decisions and not be pulled by emotion or party. That's why I will flay both HRC and President Trump, side with liberals on some issues and conservatives on others. I'm NOT a moderate. Basically I'm a philosophical conservative. I use the past to guide me but am not afraid to change when shown a better way. I believe in the vast potential of the individual and mankind in general. I'm an optimist which is why I have little tolerance for doomsayers no matter what.
gun controllers over react,.. use campus incidents to demand restrictions gun toters over react,.. use campus incidents to demand open carry If students were allowed to carry guns, the murdering psychos would be allowed to carry guns on campus too. piss him off or talk to his girlfriend, and a fired up twenty year old with raging hormones might start shooting. That would happen much more often than the very rare tragedies that you seek to prevent. I see merit in teachers being able to carry guns. In my town, a Sheriff deputy has an office in each of our two colleges and three high schools
This is where I stand, as well, although I personally don't believe in abortion, and I think it's not the government's responsibility to raise generations of children on welfare.
I'm not saying every student should be allowed to carry on campus but those with concealed carry permits tend to be overwhelmingly responsible firearm owners and are aware of and have respect for the mishandling of weapons. A lot of students are veterans who have been trained.
As a teacher, I would never want to carry a gun. And I'd probably end up being shot with it. I don't think we can take isolated incidents (horrific, though they are) to justify arming teachers--most of whom are pretty peaceful people, to start with, because we choose to work with children. My older daughter wants to be a teacher, too,, but I hope part of her teacher training does not include "how to shoot a gun." In regard to your death penalty objection, I believe that in Old West Texas, "he needed killin" was considered justified. There are, in fact, plenty of dregs of society "that need killin." Murderers are chief among them.
