Would YOU vote for RON PAUL

Fixed.

 

You are right on! We are already dominated by corporate America.
(but it can get worse if nothing is done to stop it).

 

Ron's the only one that even has a soul.Obama doesn't want to leave.I feel something will happen that postpones this years election.

 

So, you've made the assumption that I'm a Libertarian, and that by asking you to elaborate more clearly on what you had posted before responding to it demonstrates what makes the Libertarian movement dangerous?
Personally, I find that more often undesirable consequences are a result of NOT asking questions before taking actions. Government as has taken place over the last century or so has been one of "we need to do this now, and we'll fix it later."

I was asking how you were defining 'political equality' as a democratic component. I might add that your first sentence seemed to be in contradiction to the next two, which is what caused me to ask a question rather than respond immediately.

Again you made use of 'political equality', and once again I was asking to have that defined in your words.And to further complicate ones understanding, you throw in "the degree of equality being a matter of preference.", preference being a choice, but a choice of what?

Now rather than pursue continuing to discuss your original post, you bring up new topics, regulation of commerce, lawsuits, and education.

You then seem to imply that our government should remain one in which it serves the highest bidder, and all that is needed is economic equality to fix that.

It would appear that we have reached the point of becoming more of an oligarchical form of government already, and the dictatorship that exists is exercised from the Federal level, which leaves most American voters in the cold, except for when elections take place.

Perhaps it should be recognized that the 'one' area where regulations are most needed and totally lacking is in our Federal government.

 

I see. So only Ron Paul has a soul? How misguided is this notion?

 

Since "all men are created equal...

If money equals speech and corporations are persons in what sense are corporate persons equal to non-corporate persons?

 

They are both liable for the payment of taxes.

But are "all men created equal", and does money equal speech?

 

The bullshit meter is pegged. You just made that up.

The US constitution uses the phrase "all men are created equal." You are not able to explain in what sense all men are equal when comparing corporate persons with non-corporate persons.

 

What grade are you in? and what are you claiming was made up?

Would you prefer that corporations be exempted from paying taxes, which is only one example where corporations are treated as persons. I don't think anyone tries to claim that corporations are the same as a living person other than they are for legal purposes treated the same as a person, liable for taxes, liable for damages, etc. Essentially, corporations are only 'treated' as persons under our legal system, and I'm unaware of any document that claims them to be a person.

And the U.S. Constitution does NOT contain the phrase "all men are created equal", but the Declaration of Independence does, while only figuratively, not literally.

 

A legal document does not have to state something for it to be truth, btw.

 

What truth are you referring to?

 

What truth are you looking for?

 

Just to know what truth you we're referring to in your post relative to your response to my post.

 

I was talking about the truth.

 

Oh, and I thought you were disagreeing with something in my post.

 

Age doesn't matter. I've met some very bright young people here on these forums.

Yes, you're right. The US constitution does not contain the phrase "all men are created equal." I was wrong

How have you come to the conclusion that the "equality" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence is to be understood as "only figuratively, not literally?"

Figurative equality is NOT equality. Doesn't "equality" lose all meaning if it is to be understood "figuratively?"

Don't you agree that you're abusing words here?

 

I asked what grade you might be in thinking it might be possible that you have yet to study the Declaration of Independence and/or the Constitution.

Is it not obvious that all men are not created equal, even if born into the exact same amount of wealth, or to the same parents? The Declaration of Independence is a statement refusing to accept the authority of the King of Great Britain who they felt had no greater right than any other human to rule them. Essentially, the authority to govern was not to be a birthright, but determined by the governed, and in that way we are all equal if we wish to aspire to government office. Literally, we should be equal under the laws, and that is what our governments, local, State, and Federal should strive to assure, but since we are individuals first and foremost, there are many ways in which we cannot achieve equality.

And no, I don't agree at all that I am abusing words, but I fully recognize that you may not like to read what I write.

 

Oh, I thought you were someone who stood on the founding father documents...

So you disagree with the Declaration of Independence?

 

Interpretable Semantics

In what way is 'equality' referenced?

 

Clearly, I do.

I've not disagreed with the Declaration of Independence at all. Read it completely and thoroughly with exegetical intent relative to what necessitated it and then you might arrive at a more complete and accurate understanding.