Quote Originally Posted by djmaddmartin
Can you even put a paragraph together? So lets see whats on the chopping block. Loss of privacy: ( Patriot Act ) Women's right to control her own body: ( Soon to be gone Roe vs. Wade) The right for us not to have any one religion dictate political policy and rational thought: ( Seperation of Church and State disappearing) ..... I'll list more if you want me too but you can benifit from a little reading. Rubbie!
HAHAHAHAAHA Can you even follow directions?

I asked you to give me examples all you did was give me some statments!

You want to sit there and call me ignorant when when i asked you to prove yourself, you did the most Demorcratic Liberal move and didnt answer the question but with a statment. A counteroffer you will. Now with the small bit of information you have me about your first defence which wa womens rights with the case of Roe vs. Wade.

So to set this off since you really dont know what a debate is i will help you. Now jsut try and follow as i "Debate" your ignorant answers with proof ( since i wont dance around the answer like you have )!

The Patriot Act since you brought it up and i dont think you have a clue what it is i will help you. ( Oh heres my back-up for it http://www.cdt.org/security/011031summary.shtml for those who want to read it themselves. ) The Patriot Act is something that does nothing more than PROTECT your rights. People complain and bitch about how there information that is sent all around the internet every waking second of the day is unprotected from people who like to steal that information. Well the Patriot Act is being made to help Internet providers strengthen there firewalls and keep hackers out so that everything you do on the internet is secure. It also is helping the FBI CIA NSA or any other top lvl organization track down cyber criminals and terroriost or jstu any other joker screwing around with there computer, to be able to trap trace them and find there signal faster to get them behind bars. So to me that is protecting my right to privacy not trying to let everyone see it.

Now you said Roe vs. Wade ( for the people who want every bit of information http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Roe/ )

This case is nothing more than setting in motion up to today all the cases against aborations or whether it is right or wrong. That had nothing to do with womens rights, but it had to do with ethical rights. Which i cant argue against you becuase Ethical Rights is based on the person ethical decisions. But back then this lady wanted a aboration but was not given one becuase back then there had to be a direct medical reason that was at rick to the mother. But becuase the constitution was to vague the law was void becuase it didnt say yes or no to direct medical and bodily harm. So that has nothign to do with womens rights, since i the fact it is 32 years old and today things have changed.

Now onto your last few sentences where i ahve no clue what you mean since it has no meaning, but i do get what you say by Division of Church and State and that is an arguement that has been going on since Roman / Catholic times. Today it is a good thing that church adn state stay devided, but with this great nation being the land of the free, people are free to have all the religions in the world in this nation. Now since there are so many religions and so many coinsiding with each other, or course there is going to be some argument. Now i may be wrong on clarifying then tell me what you meant.

Now if you would I would love to hear your rebuttle.

Also i dont care about grammer errors or what not you get the jist and then move on.