Author Topic: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association  (Read 435 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lgm270

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1862
My idea for a new Amendment to the US Constitution:

"The right of freedom of association shall not be infringed."

Any comments?

Offline billy_56081

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8575
  • Gender: Male
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #1 on: November 04, 2010, 02:46:23 AM »
Freedom of association with what?
99% of all Lawyers give the other 1% a bad name. What I find hilarious about this is they are such an arrogant bunch, that they all think they are in the 1%.

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2010, 03:15:48 AM »
i do not see what you are trying to get at. do you have a problem being associated with someone/thing at the present time?   ???

Offline yellowtail3

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5664
  • Gender: Male
  • Oh father of the four winds, fill my sails!
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #3 on: November 04, 2010, 04:02:53 AM »
My idea for a new Amendment to the US Constitution:

"The right of freedom of association shall not be infringed."

Any comments?

Yeah... I'm not sure what the need is for this. I don't think anyone will stop you from associating with Billy & PowerPuff, or whoever...
Jesus said we should treat other as we'd want to be treated... and he didn't qualify that by their party affiliation, race, or even if they're of diff religion.

Offline subdjoe

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3036
  • Gender: Male
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2010, 06:13:43 AM »
I think I may know where this is headed.  In the past 20 years or so we have seen mens clubs, mens gyms, schools, etc. forced by law to accept women members.  We have seen any group that had been for whites, or WASPS, forced to accept "others." Yet we still see womens only clubs, schools, and gyms, with people praising them for empowering women.  We see things like the Congressional Black Caucus, the Black this or that, the Hispanic League, anything except things for men only or whites only.  This seems to be a back lash against those kinds of things.

I would argue that it exists already with the enumerated protected right of peaceable assembly in the 1st and the unenumerated but still protected rights implied in the 9th.  We just need to get the PC crowd to back off.

I will note that when a guy sued to join a womans gym the left and PC crowd were up in arms about it, the though it a violation of womens right to "feel safe."  They didn't seem to be able to see their double standard.
Your ob't & etc,
Joseph Lovell

Justice Robert H. Jackson - It is not the function of the government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error.

Offline lgm270

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1862
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2010, 07:16:17 AM »
That so many "Americans" are so puzzled by the most basic and fundamental principle of a free society, i.e. the  right of freedom of association,  is truly scary.

Offline myronman3

  • Moderator
  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4837
  • Gender: Male
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #6 on: November 04, 2010, 11:17:23 AM »
That so many "Americans" are so puzzled by the most basic and fundamental principle of a free society, i.e. the  right of freedom of association,  is truly scary.
  another post that doesnt make much of any sense.   it appears to me as though you are trying to take some sort of moral high ground about something or another; and trying to position yourself as having some sort of superior intellect.    and if that is what you are trying to imply; congratulations!   you have just made yourself  irrellevant.

Offline lgm270

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1862
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #7 on: November 04, 2010, 11:28:49 AM »
That so many "Americans" are so puzzled by the most basic and fundamental principle of a free society, i.e. the  right of freedom of association,  is truly scary.
 another post that doesnt make much of any sense.   it appears to me as though you are trying to take some sort of moral high ground about something or another; and trying to position yourself as having some sort of superior intellect.    and if that is what you are trying to imply; congratulations!   you have just made yourself  irrellevant.

'Irrellevant"?  

Offline SHOOTALL

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23836
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2010, 11:38:34 AM »
In Va. a couple years ago there was talk about a law that would force clubs to accept outsiders . The example was hunting clubs , if an unknown wanted in then they would have to be admitted . It was rumored that if not then the club would not be allowed to rent land , do fund raisers and would be taxed . Nothing ever came of it really.
 When all men throw off the cover of PC and stop bending over for it we will have a better world. We have women in locker rooms with naked ball players but one remark and she is offended SO WHAT GET OVER IT . BTW what respectful woman would put herself in there ? The players should walk out ( after dressing ) . and refuse to play if women are allowed in the dressing room.
If ya can see it ya can hit it !

Offline beerbelly

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1625
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #9 on: November 04, 2010, 11:49:14 AM »
I am all for it, clubs, and any other origination should not have to let anyone in they don't want in! that is freedom of association. Lets say my club wants to exclude queers. We should be able to do that. No one should be forced to assonate with anyone

Offline SHOOTALL

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23836
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #10 on: November 04, 2010, 11:55:40 AM »
I am all for it, clubs, and any other origination should not have to let anyone in they don't want in! that is freedom of association. Lets say my club wants to exclude queers. We should be able to do that. No one should be forced to assonate with anyone
maybe your club should be don't ask don't tell !  ;D
If ya can see it ya can hit it !

Offline lgm270

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1862
Re: Proposed Constitutional Amedment: The Right of Freedom of Association
« Reply #11 on: November 04, 2010, 02:20:02 PM »
The right of freedom of association would apply to all relationships including personal, professional, business, religious, etc.  

This amendment would blow out the Civil Rights Act of '64, and gazillions of other "anti-discrimination"  laws.  Discrimination is a very important survival mechanism by which the healthy protect themselves from the hazards of unhealthy associations.  Example:  If a wedding photographer doesn't want to shoot a "same-sex marriage" or a minister doesn't want to perform a same sex marriage, they can tell  them to go to Hell!   If a store clerk says "Merry Christmas" and some Jew comes out of the woodwork bitching that he feels "excluded" or that it is "discrimination", the store can tell him to go to Hell.  A citizen or private business would  have the absolute right to sell  or rent property to anyone they choose  for whatever reason.  Same with private schools.   The right of white parents to send white children to racially segregated white private schools and not be beaten up and abused by Black and Hispanic  gangbangers could not be infringed under my proposed constitutional amendment. If blacks and Hispanic gangbangers want to shoot each other and major in black studies, that's their business and they can do it at the O.J. Simpson Public High School and  not at the George Washington Private Academy (tax deductible) where our children are taught courtesy, civility, history, science, engineering, math, etc.,  and where they can say a prayer and say "Merry Christmas" and sing Christmas carols  if they want to!    We respect their "culture" and they stay the Hell out of ours.

Blacks already have all black businesses, newspapers, etc.  Here in Los Angeles we have a "black newspaper" call the Sentinel.  All writers and staff are black. All photos in the paper are of black people.  How do they have a "black newspaper"?  They make hiring decisions based on race.  This is a complete violation of the  Civil Rights Act of 1964 and various state "anti-discrimination laws."  The problem is that most civil rights laws do not protect white peoples' rights, but are designed to be enforced against white people and to force the infiltration and destruction of white institutions. Government tax money goes to "Historic Black Colleges."   Our current President attended a church for more than 20 years based on the "Black Value System."    Nobody ever asked him how "black values" were different from "white values", but apparently they are.  No one asked him why his church members can openly  discriminate racially in their choice of stores, employees, hiring, education  and spending consumer dollars and other decisions, but  it did.

Same with the Hispanics. They have their own "community", their own racist organizations (La Raza, etc.), newspapers, employers, businesses, etc. and nobody bothers them on the grounds that they're guilty of "discrimination."  Like Blacks, Hispanics are free to crap all over white people if they want to without any consequence.  

The Jews have their own country, the Jewish State of Israel,  the fourth largest nuclear power, that exists only  because of billions of tax dollars from millions of Christian tax payers who are forced to support a state based on a religion they do not share.  American Christians are screwed out of billions in taxes and then told they can't  say "Merry Christmas" in  department stores  because it's "discrimination."  If Jews want my tax dollars to subsidize Israel, they can live with hearing  white people say Merry Christmas in public  or take their business somewhere else instead of bankrupting  one of us with a civil rights complaint for "discrimination."    

The bottom line is that every single racial group has its own "community" which is sancrosanct...except white people.  It's time to change this and restore white people to first class citizenship so that they are on equal footing with other races who openly discriminate against outsiders and in favor of their own race, tribe, etc.

The only purpose of so called  anti-discrimination laws is to screw white people and strip white people of the right to chose their  personal and business associations.  If Blacks and Mexicans and others can discriminate in favor of their own kind and against us, we should have equal rights to do the same thing and to chose our associations the same way their chose theirs.

 If the President of the United States can openly attend a church that openly advises its members to violate the civil rights laws,  just why are those laws relevant?  They're not relevant. They should be nullified by whatever means possible.  Better through constitutional amendment than by second amendment remedies.  

The Right of Freedom of Association Shall Not Be Infringed.
   Has a nice ring to it!  :)