foreign rule? Remember the colonists were citizens of England at the time. They mainly objected to paying for a war they wanted.
larry On 1/20/06, Chesty Puller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I tend to think that society progresses with or without government > intervention. After all, slavery was an idea doomed to without a civil war > had they just let it be. Civil rights have strengthened not because of > government, but because some people got up and made it happen. Jim Crow > laws would have eventually faded away much like laws prohibiting sodomy or > interracial marriage. Not to say that it's not a good thing, but rather > that local rule is a big reason that there even is a union, and it's a very > important part of living. Foreign rule is what caused the Revolution to > begin with. > > - Matt > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Larry C. Lyons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 2:08 PM > Subject: Re: States Rights: was(RE: [signs of sanity] MD no longer > subsidizing Walmart) > > > > you mean like as in the pre civil rights movement states rights. It > > was only through federal intervention that freedoms and rights such as > > voting rights were strenghened. > > > > larry > > > > On 1/20/06, Tim Heald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Which I think gives me a great time to segway into States rights. > >> > >> If we actually followed the constitution, and didn't have such a strong > >> federal government. I would have a lot less issues with things like > >> this, > >> because I could simply move to a state that more closely followed with my > >> personal beliefs. Why don't republicans and Democrats see that if we > >> weaken > >> federal government and strengthen the States, we could have far more > >> freedom, and all the division that we have going on today would be > >> unnecessary? > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 12:01 PM > >> > To: CF-Community > >> > Subject: Re: [signs of sanity] MD no longer subsidizing Walmart > >> > > >> > ok good. When I saw activity in this thrad I was like omg do > >> > we really have to do this some more? I don't think there is > >> > going to be agreement on this regardless. > >> > > >> > > >> > >*quickly shaves small black mustache* > >> > > > >> > >Oh I did not take it personally. Had I taken it personally I > >> > probably > >> > >would have called out a few explicits and what nots myself. Just > >> > >showing my displeasure that they were attached to my comments :) > >> > > > >> > >Adam > >> > > > >> > >On 1/20/06, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:193578 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
