I dont care about your gay sophistry. All of my rights are violated by importing them. None of them are being violated by removing them at status quo.
The founders wrote about people like you 🤡 GFY youre satisfied to get checkmated by the Cloward Pivon plan and still have your rights taken anyway
How are your rights violated by them being here? I believe they should be removed, but not by murdering them (violating their right to life), bc right come from God, not the govt.
I guess you're too retarded to know how to create a lifestyle that removes you from the system that is implementing the cloward pivon plan. I'm out in my own community asserting my rights and active in local politics, what are you doing besides being a keyboard warrior?
They are violated by them coming here and increasing my tax burden (property), causing more crime (threat to life), and voting for more gay race communism (all three)
Bitcoin doesnt remove millions of illegals. You running away to a red county does not stop a multigenerational plan to turn the country into South Africa. You can stop LARPing now.
Just box me or shut the fuck up tough guy idc about your vapid opinions.
Ah, so the immigrants are violating your rights by proxy because the state is stealing from you.
I don't think I've heard a gayer argument, nor does that standup to any philosophical scrutiny. Someone can't violate your rights by proxy. Now you could argue that the negative externalities created from keeping them hear makes the state increase your taxes, but that is different from violating your rights. You don't have a right to low taxes.
"I guess you're too retarded to know how to create a lifestyle that removes you from the system that is implementing the cloward pivon plan."
Uhhhhh. Why should we have to?
You can act like you're somehow superior for your choices that navigate around this system but like. You're not arguing in favor of destroying it. You're not saying that the people behind it or the ones that benefit from it are evil people who should for all intents and purposes be hanged publicly.
And then you're saying the idea of "defending your country" doesn't apply here?
Contradictory much?
The welfare state shouldn't exist. Attack that and legally remove illegals. That's what I'm advocating for.
And no I don't think people with a different political ideology from me should be hanged. That's statist bullshit and if you advocate for it, it will be used against you.
If you're being robber by the state to fund welfare, it's on you to either end that policy by the state or figure out how to not contribute to that program. Not advocate for murdering illegals and those associated with them.
You keep saying "defending your country" like I am opposed to fighting these dog shit ideas. I'm not, but you can't use state sponsored violence and illegal methods to defend your country, bc then you're contributing just as much to the downfall of the US. You sound like you would be on the side of the ATF in Waco to defend the US against Christian extremism or some shit.
"The welfare state shouldn't exist. Attack that and legally remove illegals. That's what I'm advocating for."
Too slow.
"And no I don't think people with a different political ideology from me should be hanged. That's statist bullshit and if you advocate for it, it will be used against you."
Treason isn't a political ideology. Advocating for the invasion of the country is treason. It's an act of war.
"If you're being robber by the state to fund welfare, it's on you to either end that policy by the state or figure out how to not contribute to that program. Not advocate for murdering illegals and those associated with them."
Too slow.
"You keep saying "defending your country" like I am opposed to fighting these dog shit ideas. I'm not, but you can't use state sponsored violence and illegal methods to defend your country, bc then you're contributing just as much to the downfall of the US. You sound like you would be on the side of the ATF in Waco to defend the US against Christian extremism or some shit."
Too slow. Can and should. No you're not. That's a false equivalence.
Fuck off dude, too slow is not a valid response when the govt was literally designed to move slowly to protect peoples rights.
"Treason isn't a political ideology. Advocating..."
Wrong, you can advocate for litterally anything in America except for violence against a specific person. Nazis advocate to kill all Jews, BLM folks were saying kill all whites, etc. It's not treason until there are actions taken and even then you have to prove it in court.
"Levying war against the United States, or
Adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort"
Importing millions of people that are diametrically opposed to the American way of life and aim to destroy fundamental protections of rights in the constitution are treasons acts. Treason is not a political ideology. Aiding and comforting our enemies is also taking place. Again. Treason is not a political ideology.
Too slow is a completely valid response. It's the basis for emergency declarations, war powers, executive orders, emergency legislation.
What fucking enemies dude? I bet half of the people you're talking about are from countries we are allied with.
"It was not enough, Chief Justice John Marshall’s opinion emphasized, merely to conspire “to subvert by force the government of our country” by recruiting troops, procuring maps, and drawing up plans. Conspiring to levy war was distinct from actually levying war."
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-iii/clauses/39
"A citizen intellectually or emotionally may favor the enemy and harbor sympathies or convictions disloyal to this country’s policy or interest, but, so long as he commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy, there is no treason."
What you're talking about is not treason, it's conspiracy. Unless you can define this enemy you're speaking of, it doesn't fit the definition of treason, you're just making a boogeyman.
Again. There is no evidence I could potentially present that will get you to believe the things I'm saying and realistically I don't care to waste my time trying.
I don't care about that justice's opinion.
And I don't care about your opinion of his opinion either.
Bc, like illegal immigrants, you don't respect the rule of law. You don't have principles, you just point and say "this is wrong, that is right" arbitrarily and use that to justify violence. I don't respect the law myself, but the government HAS to follow it, otherwise we live in a monarchy and the rules only apply to citizens.
A judge's opinion is not the rule of law.
Illegal immigrants don't deserve respect.
Invasion and treason justify violence.
Pretty simple really.
"A judge" its literally the "opinion" of the supreme court.
Invasion and tresson justify violence. Your definition of those words doesn't meet the standard of the highest law of the land. If the supreme courts opinion isn't valid, then I assert that you are being treasonous and all violence against you is permitted, because we're just using arbitrary definitions.
Nope. You're conflating judgement and governance.
lol look how quickly you've decided that violence against me is warranted and I'm a random citizen. Funny how that works.
I think I'll take this as you conceding your argument because you've now advocated for the force of the American government to be levied on me as a tactic of debate.
We're done here. Bye.
See, you don't like when an arbitrary definition of treason is applied to you. Lol I just used your own logic against you and it triggered you so bad you rage quit
