Religions > Atheism > All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
05 Nov 2007 05:18:29 PM |
| Object: |
All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR07I05&f=WX06L03
FRC to Congress: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal
Justice Under the Law
Washington D.C. - Family Research Council President Tony Perkins
called the Senate vote on so-called hate crimes "a discriminatory move
creating second-class victims." The Senate voted 60-39 on an amendment
offered by Sen. Ted Kennedy to the Defense Authorization bill which
would give the federal government jurisdiction over virtually every
"hate crime," regardless of whether the states seek federal
involvement. The provision would also add "sexual orientation" and
gender identity to the list of "hate crimes" already covered by
federal law.
"A vote in favor of so-called 'hate crimes' legislation today is a
direct violation of the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause,"
Perkins said. "Congress needs to remember that preserving equal
justice under the law is more important than scoring points with
advocates of homosexual behavior."
"All violent crimes are hate crimes, and every victim is equally
important. We applaud the President's intention to veto this
unconstitutional betrayal of victims' rights. All our citizens deserve
equal justice under the law. Congress should represent all Americans,
not give special protections for some."
.
|
|
| User: "Mark Sebree" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 03:45:19 PM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 3:33 pm, "John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
Go to a debate room,
I am already in one.
Besides, I am not subject to your commands. I can do as I wish.
you god damned argumentative fraudulent loser.
You obviously don't like the truth and the facts. You are the only
fraud or loser here, and since this is a debating forum, there is no
problem with being argumentative, which you are as well. However,
unlike you, I am not a hypocrite and I can support my position with
objective facts.
You're a god damned liar, and a god damned idiot.
That is you, as you have proven many, many times. You lie about
everyone that disagrees with you, you continue to prove that you have
no idea what you are talking about when you post, and you are hateful
and intolerant of virtually everyone with any intelligence and
education.
Get used to me. I am not going anywhere.
Mark Sebree
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew F. Heil" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 09:07:27 AM |
|
|
On Nov 6, 9:26 pm, "John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruff...@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:EJ3Yi.67130$c9.65430@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
"Al Klein" <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:v0h1j3h2puu6je0hev8136kpcr3mpeovaf@4ax.com...
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:28:56 -0500, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"J Young" <younginsig...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1194304709.184721.246140@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR07I05&f=WX06L03
FRC to Congress: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal
Justice Under the Law
Enhanced punishments are unconstitutional.
The Constitution doesn't say that.
Not to idiots such as yourself.
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
Your gay pride lingo is failing you.
Enhanced = extra, excessive, additional, augmented.
So the Constitution bans sentencing enhancements? How about that.
Let us examine this notion.
Third strike laws? (Sentenced enhanced because of prior convictions?
Unconstitutional!)
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the murder victim was
law enforcement? (Sentence enhanced because of the profession of the
victim? Unconstitutional!)
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the kidnap victim was a
child? (Sentence enhanced because of the age of the victim?
Unconstitutional!)
Brilliant ...
Finally, I see you've staked out a position well to the right of
Scalia and Thomas (who, along with the rest of the United States
Supreme Court, understand that sentencing enhancements are perfectly
Constitutional).
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 02:30:25 PM |
|
|
"Andrew F. Heil" <andrewfheil2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1194448047.674109.218410@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 6, 9:26 pm, "John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruff...@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:EJ3Yi.67130$c9.65430@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
"Al Klein" <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:v0h1j3h2puu6je0hev8136kpcr3mpeovaf@4ax.com...
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:28:56 -0500, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"J Young" <younginsig...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1194304709.184721.246140@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR07I05&f=WX06L03
FRC to Congress: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal
Justice Under the Law
Enhanced punishments are unconstitutional.
The Constitution doesn't say that.
Not to idiots such as yourself.
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
Your gay pride lingo is failing you.
Enhanced = extra, excessive, additional, augmented.
So the Constitution bans sentencing enhancements? How about that.
Let us examine this notion.
Third strike laws? (Sentenced enhanced because of prior convictions?
Unconstitutional!)
True.
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the murder victim was
law enforcement? (Sentence enhanced because of the profession of the
victim? Unconstitutional!)
Very true.
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the kidnap victim was a
child? (Sentence enhanced because of the age of the victim?
Unconstitutional!)
According to the 14th Amendment, you are correct.
Brilliant ...
I am aware of that aspect of the Constitution.
Finally, I see you've staked out a position well to the right of
Scalia and Thomas (who, along with the rest of the United States
Supreme Court, understand that sentencing enhancements are perfectly
Constitutional).
Thank you.
I am sure they would be pleased to know how to operate the nation more
productively and without discrimination.
You know I wasn't aware that they needed more education in the proper
application of the verbatim constitution.
I am pleased to know that someone other than myself is rational enough to be
able to notice such themselves.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrew F. Heil" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 06:07:11 PM |
|
|
On Nov 7, 2:30 pm, "John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"Andrew F. Heil" <andrewfhe...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:1194448047.674109.218410@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 6, 9:26 pm, "John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruff...@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:EJ3Yi.67130$c9.65430@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
"Al Klein" <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:v0h1j3h2puu6je0hev8136kpcr3mpeovaf@4ax.com...
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:28:56 -0500, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"J Young" <younginsig...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1194304709.184721.246140@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR07I05&f=WX06L03
FRC to Congress: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal
Justice Under the Law
Enhanced punishments are unconstitutional.
The Constitution doesn't say that.
Not to idiots such as yourself.
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
Your gay pride lingo is failing you.
Enhanced = extra, excessive, additional, augmented.
So the Constitution bans sentencing enhancements? How about that.
Let us examine this notion.
Third strike laws? (Sentenced enhanced because of prior convictions?
Unconstitutional!)
True.
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the murder victim was
law enforcement? (Sentence enhanced because of the profession of the
victim? Unconstitutional!)
Very true.
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the kidnap victim was a
child? (Sentence enhanced because of the age of the victim?
Unconstitutional!)
According to the 14th Amendment, you are correct.
Only if you think that age is a protected class under the Fourteenth
Amendment. Why you would be under such a delusion is beyond me, but
it's right on par with your general ignorance of issues
Constitutional.
But then, such people like you, who think "The Constitution means
whatever I happen to want it to mean!" are a dime a dozen. Most of
them aren't stupid enough to think that such a stance has any logic to
it, though.
Then there's you and your ilk ...
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 08:14:16 PM |
|
|
"Andrew F. Heil" <andrewfheil2@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1194480431.871839.233530@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 7, 2:30 pm, "John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"Andrew F. Heil" <andrewfhe...@yahoo.com> wrote in
messagenews:1194448047.674109.218410@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 6, 9:26 pm, "John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruff...@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:EJ3Yi.67130$c9.65430@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
"Al Klein" <ruk...@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:v0h1j3h2puu6je0hev8136kpcr3mpeovaf@4ax.com...
On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 10:28:56 -0500, "John D. Wentzky"
<wxpprofessio...@msn.com> wrote:
"J Young" <younginsig...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1194304709.184721.246140@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PR07I05&f=WX06L03
FRC to Congress: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect
Equal
Justice Under the Law
Enhanced punishments are unconstitutional.
The Constitution doesn't say that.
Not to idiots such as yourself.
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
Your gay pride lingo is failing you.
Enhanced = extra, excessive, additional, augmented.
So the Constitution bans sentencing enhancements? How about that.
Let us examine this notion.
Third strike laws? (Sentenced enhanced because of prior convictions?
Unconstitutional!)
True.
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the murder victim was
law enforcement? (Sentence enhanced because of the profession of the
victim? Unconstitutional!)
Very true.
Longer sentence (or capital sentence) because the kidnap victim was a
child? (Sentence enhanced because of the age of the victim?
Unconstitutional!)
According to the 14th Amendment, you are correct.
Only if you think that age is a protected class under the Fourteenth
Amendment. Why you would be under such a delusion is beyond me, but
it's right on par with your general ignorance of issues
Constitutional.
You lost track.
You said that age discrimination is illegal. I agreed.
Can't you keep up with your own words?
But then, such people like you, who think "The Constitution means
whatever I happen to want it to mean!" are a dime a dozen.
You lost track so fast.
Your problem.
Most of them aren't stupid enough to think that such a stance has any
logic to
it, though.
Most people such as me don't lose track of their own words and fall off what
they had previously typed like you did.
Then there's you and your ilk ...
You lost.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 08:00:45 AM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a different
word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of sin.
--
And that's why all those soldiers you don't care about (and won't fight
beside) have to die tonight - bleeding and screaming in mortal agony.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 02:34:30 PM |
|
|
"Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> wrote in message
news:53kYi.4511$ww2.1487@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a different
word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of sin.
I wonder if that is the real thing or if it is also a
manifestation/infestation of their attempt at getting misplaced vengeance on
those who have dissed them for so long already?
--
And that's why all those soldiers you don't care about (and won't fight
beside) have to die tonight - bleeding and screaming in mortal agony.
LOL!
True.
They cry wolf all day long and demand that the government protect them after
they caused so many problems themselves.
I remember something my father told me once a long time ago about "Just say
no."
When they ask for something just tell them "No."
Sorta like fraudulent blacks who accuse all whites of being racists after
the black was denied a job or a sports contract.
Telling them "NO" is much easier when you hand the job to another white.
LOL!
HAHAHAHAHAHAH!
If that pisses them off tell them they can go back to Africa with all those
free handouts they got already and stop bitching at white people all day
long.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 07:45:36 PM |
|
|
In News 53kYi.4511$ww2.1487@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net,, Sanders Kaufman at
bucky@kaufman.net, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments, only excessive punishments. The two terms are not
interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a
different word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of
sin.
Words have meanings kaufman, if you don't like it, move to another planet.
--
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong
enough to take away everything you have."
Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sanders Kaufman" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 02:49:01 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Hd2dnSK4VZzd96_anZ2dnUVZ_vqpnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News 53kYi.4511$ww2.1487@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net,, Sanders Kaufman
at
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments, only excessive punishments. The two terms are not
interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a
different word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of
sin.
Words have meanings kaufman, if you don't like it, move to another planet.
That's one of the biggest problems with you half-wits.
You don't get that *different* words have *different* meanings.
Interestingly, rather than educate yourselves on your own native tongue, you
demand we shut down public education to dumb down everyone else to your
level.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
07 Nov 2007 08:15:35 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Hd2dnSK4VZzd96_anZ2dnUVZ_vqpnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News 53kYi.4511$ww2.1487@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net,, Sanders Kaufman
at bucky@kaufman.net, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments, only excessive punishments. The two terms are not
interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a
different word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of
sin.
Words have meanings kaufman, if you don't like it, move to another planet.
A planet where assholes such as yourself don't support things that are NOT
in the Constitution itself?
That planet is earth and the nation is the USA where unconstitutional
assholes such as yourself are classified as idiots and traitors to the
Constitution.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 03:08:35 AM |
|
|
In News ejuYi.51480$8G5.49149@bignews4.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky at
wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Hd2dnSK4VZzd96_anZ2dnUVZ_vqpnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News 53kYi.4511$ww2.1487@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net,, Sanders
Kaufman at bucky@kaufman.net, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments, only excessive punishments. The two terms are not
interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a
different word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of
sin.
Words have meanings kaufman, if you don't like it, move to another
planet.
A planet where assholes such as yourself don't support things that
are NOT in the Constitution itself?
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky. The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it does.
That planet is earth and the nation is the USA where unconstitutional
assholes such as yourself are classified as idiots and traitors to the
Constitution.
You're a liar, Wentzky.
--
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong
enough to take away everything you have."
Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 10:37:01 AM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
In News ejuYi.51480$8G5.49149@bignews4.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky at
wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Hd2dnSK4VZzd96_anZ2dnUVZ_vqpnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News 53kYi.4511$ww2.1487@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net,, Sanders
Kaufman at bucky@kaufman.net, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments, only excessive punishments. The two terms are not
interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a
different word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of
sin.
Words have meanings kaufman, if you don't like it, move to another
planet.
A planet where assholes such as yourself don't support things that
are NOT in the Constitution itself?
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky. The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself, YOU!
Read those two sentences you wrote.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 10:38:41 AM |
|
|
In News OWGYi.18585$a9.8320@bignews5.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky at
wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
In News ejuYi.51480$8G5.49149@bignews4.bellsouth.net,, John D.
Wentzky at wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Hd2dnSK4VZzd96_anZ2dnUVZ_vqpnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News 53kYi.4511$ww2.1487@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net,, Sanders
Kaufman at bucky@kaufman.net, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments, only excessive punishments. The two terms are not
interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a
different word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself
of sin.
Words have meanings kaufman, if you don't like it, move to another
planet.
A planet where assholes such as yourself don't support things that
are NOT in the Constitution itself?
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky. The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it
does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself,
There is no contradiction, liar Wentzky. Read for comprehension.
--
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong
enough to take away everything you have."
Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 11:48:34 AM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:-9ydncv48fINpq7anZ2dnUVZ_sejnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News OWGYi.18585$a9.8320@bignews5.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky at
wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky. The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it
does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself,
There is no contradiction, liar Wentzky. Read for comprehension.
That you support that which you say is not in the constitution, enhanced
penaties, and that you say you support ONLY that which is in the
Constitution is an instance of you contradicting yourself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 12:17:59 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:TZHYi.29566$N7.28996@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:-9ydncv48fINpq7anZ2dnUVZ_sejnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News OWGYi.18585$a9.8320@bignews5.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky at
wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky. The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it
does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself,
There is no contradiction, liar Wentzky. Read for comprehension.
That you support that which you say is not in the constitution,
Which is a proscription against excessive, cruel, and unusual punishments.
I am in full support of this proscription.
enhanced penaties, and that you say you support ONLY that which is in the
Constitution is an instance of you contradicting yourself.
There is no proscription against enhanced punishments, ergo, I do not
support such a proscription.
No contradiction exists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 12:59:11 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:spIYi.4741$3Z2.4522@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:TZHYi.29566$N7.28996@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:-9ydncv48fINpq7anZ2dnUVZ_sejnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News OWGYi.18585$a9.8320@bignews5.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky at
wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky. The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it
does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself,
There is no contradiction, liar Wentzky. Read for comprehension.
That you support that which you say is not in the constitution,
Which is a proscription against excessive, cruel, and unusual punishments.
I am in full support of this proscription.
Those are in the constitution.
Enhanced punishments are NOT in the Constitution.
enhanced penaties, and that you say you support ONLY that which is in the
Constitution is an instance of you contradicting yourself.
There is no proscription against enhanced punishments, ergo, I do not
support such a proscription.
There is nothing in the constitution that warrants enhanced punishments.
No contradiction exists.
Wrong.
You split my statement in an erroneous attempt at denying the contradiction
in your language.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 01:27:26 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:40JYi.17384$W9.1638@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:spIYi.4741$3Z2.4522@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:TZHYi.29566$N7.28996@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:-9ydncv48fINpq7anZ2dnUVZ_sejnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News OWGYi.18585$a9.8320@bignews5.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky at
wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky.
The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it
does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself,
There is no contradiction, liar Wentzky. Read for comprehension.
That you support that which you say is not in the constitution,
Which is a proscription against excessive, cruel, and unusual
punishments. I am in full support of this proscription.
Those are in the constitution.
Yep, and I fully support the defined proscriptions outlined in the
Constitution.
Enhanced punishments are NOT in the Constitution.
That's what I've been telling you all along, bonehead.
enhanced penaties, and that you say you support ONLY that which is in
the Constitution is an instance of you contradicting yourself.
There is no proscription against enhanced punishments, ergo, I do not
support such a proscription.
There is nothing in the constitution that warrants enhanced punishments.
Which is irrelevant. There is nothing in the Constitution that proscribes
enhanced punishments, ergo I do not support proscriptions against enhanced
punishments. Particularly at the state and local levels.
No contradiction exists.
Wrong.
No, liar Wentzky, I am 100% correct.
You split my statement in an erroneous attempt at denying the
contradiction in your language.
You attempted to create a contradiction where none existed. There was no
contradiction in my language.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 01:40:46 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:yqJYi.20334$JD.720@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:40JYi.17384$W9.1638@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:spIYi.4741$3Z2.4522@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:TZHYi.29566$N7.28996@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:-9ydncv48fINpq7anZ2dnUVZ_sejnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News OWGYi.18585$a9.8320@bignews5.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky
at wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky. The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it
does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself,
There is no contradiction, liar Wentzky. Read for comprehension.
That you support that which you say is not in the constitution,
Which is a proscription against excessive, cruel, and unusual
punishments. I am in full support of this proscription.
Those are in the constitution.
Yep, and I fully support the defined proscriptions outlined in the
Constitution.
Enhanced punishments are NOT in the Constitution.
That's what I've been telling you all along, bonehead.
That is why you can NOT assert that enhanced punishments are Constitutional.
You *ARE* an idiot to deviate from the Constitutional language.
It ISN'T in there should be enough to tell you that it isn't proper.
You satanic punishment fools are really going to be sorry by being so
anti-constitutional.
enhanced penaties, and that you say you support ONLY that which is in
the Constitution is an instance of you contradicting yourself.
There is no proscription against enhanced punishments, ergo, I do not
support such a proscription.
There is nothing in the constitution that warrants enhanced punishments.
Which is irrelevant.
A total lie.
It is VERY relevant, you fiction proponent.
There is nothing in the Constitution that proscribes enhanced punishments,
Means they are NOT constitutional.
ergo I do not support proscriptions against enhanced punishments.
The Constitution itself isn't for enhanced punishments.
Why are you imagining that it is when it isn't?
Particularly at the state and local levels.
What an idiotic assertion to make.
Enhanced punishments are illegal.
No contradiction exists.
Wrong.
No, liar Wentzky, I am 100% correct.
You are 100 percent incorrect; and, you did contradict yourself.
You split my statement in an erroneous attempt at denying the
contradiction in your language.
You attempted to create a contradiction where none existed.
I showed you explicitly where you contradicted yourself.
There was no contradiction in my language.
Denial is your ally, huh?
Fraud.
You are lying.
Why can't you stand up to your own words?
You can't because you are for falsehood.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 01:48:49 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:4DJYi.54807$b9.47653@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:yqJYi.20334$JD.720@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:40JYi.17384$W9.1638@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:spIYi.4741$3Z2.4522@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:TZHYi.29566$N7.28996@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:-9ydncv48fINpq7anZ2dnUVZ_sejnZ2d@comcast.com...
In News OWGYi.18585$a9.8320@bignews5.bellsouth.net,, John D. Wentzky
at wxpprofessional@msn.com, typed this:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:e_ydnUuEyraPT6_anZ2dnUVZ_siknZ2d@comcast.com...
I support only that which is in the constutition, liar Wentzky.
The
constitution does not talk about enhanced penalties as you claim it
does.
Look at the idiot contradicting himself,
There is no contradiction, liar Wentzky. Read for comprehension.
That you support that which you say is not in the constitution,
Which is a proscription against excessive, cruel, and unusual
punishments. I am in full support of this proscription.
Those are in the constitution.
Yep, and I fully support the defined proscriptions outlined in the
Constitution.
Enhanced punishments are NOT in the Constitution.
That's what I've been telling you all along, bonehead.
That is why you can NOT assert that enhanced punishments are
Constitutional.
I assert that they are not unConstitutional. Ergo, they must be
Constitutional. The only proscriptions against punishments are excessive,
unusual, and cruel. As long as the enhanced punishments do not fall into
any of the three, then they are not unConstitutional. Ergo, enhanced
punishments as related to current hate crime legislation are not
unConstitutional
You *ARE* an idiot to deviate from the Constitutional language.
No, you *ARE* the idiot as I have not deviated one iota from the
Constitutional Language.
enhanced penaties, and that you say you support ONLY that which is in
the Constitution is an instance of you contradicting yourself.
There is no proscription against enhanced punishments, ergo, I do not
support such a proscription.
There is nothing in the constitution that warrants enhanced punishments.
Which is irrelevant.
A total lie.
No, a 100% Truth.
It is VERY relevant, you fiction proponent.
Nope, it is entirely irrelevant.
There is nothing in the Constitution that proscribes enhanced
punishments,
Means they are NOT constitutional.
Nope, it means that they are not unConstitutional.
ergo I do not support proscriptions against enhanced punishments.
The Constitution itself isn't for enhanced punishments.
It isn't against enhanced punishments.
Why are you imagining that it is when it isn't?
Why are you imagining that it is when it isn't?
Particularly at the state and local levels.
What an idiotic assertion to make.
Enhanced punishments are illegal.
Not even remotely, as long as they do not violate the three proscriptions
given in the Constitution.
No contradiction exists.
Wrong.
No, liar Wentzky, I am 100% correct.
You are 100 percent incorrect;
No liar Wentzky, I am 100 percent correct.
You split my statement in an erroneous attempt at denying the
contradiction in your language.
You attempted to create a contradiction where none existed.
I showed you explicitly where you contradicted yourself.
You showed nothing of the kind, since no contradiction existed.
There was no contradiction in my language.
Denial is your ally, huh?
Truth is my sword, lies are your shield.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 02:33:55 PM |
|
|
Your opinion is in error.
You are an argumentative pest.
Bye, loser.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 04:07:08 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
Your opinion is in error.
You are an argumentative pest.
Bye, loser.
Apparently, you like getting massacred in what passes for "debate" from you.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2007-08 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 2, Lake Erie 1 (SO) (November 4)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, November 8 at Milwaukee, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 02:35:58 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:WoKYi.17422$W9.3947@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
Your opinion is in error.
No, my facts are 100% accurate, liar Wentzky.
You are an argumentative pest.
Your surrender has been accepted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 02:37:52 PM |
|
|
Your opinion is in error.
You are an argumentative pest.
You are defeated.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 04:07:50 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
Your opinion is in error.
You are an argumentative pest.
You are defeated.
You are delusional, and no one has to accept your hallucinations. *click*
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2007-08 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 2, Lake Erie 1 (SO) (November 4)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, November 8 at Milwaukee, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 02:38:34 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:DsKYi.17427$W9.11088@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
Your opinion is in error.
You are an argumentative pest.
You are defeated.
Your surrender is noted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 02:53:56 PM |
|
|
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:ftKYi.1223$0Q5.180@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:DsKYi.17427$W9.11088@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
Your opinion is in error.
You are an argumentative pest.
You are defeated.
Your surrender is noted.
Note that in your log then you god damned fool and stop acting like such a
god damned pest.
Otherwise expect me to chastise your god damned traitorous self to hell and
don't expect me to let you out of it by lying to me or about me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scruffy McScruffovitch" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 02:57:15 PM |
|
|
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:HHKYi.17433$W9.14685@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:ftKYi.1223$0Q5.180@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
"John D. Wentzky" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote in message
news:DsKYi.17427$W9.11088@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
Your opinion is in error.
You are an argumentative pest.
You are defeated.
Your surrender is noted.
Note that in your log
Your surrender is noted.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kenneth Doyle" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Underthe Law |
07 Nov 2007 08:03:50 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 08:00:45 -0600, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
news:Yz4Yi.3071$3Z2.863@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments, only excessive punishments. The two terms are not
interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a different
word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of sin.
What's *really* disgusting is the fact that some deluded arsehole thinks
that his imaginary friend gave him the right to condemn others to eternal
torture. I'll bet you get all hot and moist when you fantasize about us
sinners burning in Hell. What a fucking pig.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
08 Nov 2007 10:52:41 PM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman <bucky@kaufman.net> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a different
word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of sin.
It's not the same act, idiot. You're arguing that a $100 fine is
"cruel and unusual punishment" while the rational people understand
that it's just an enhancement for getting caught breaking traffic
laws too often.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: All Violent Crimes are Hate Crimes, Protect Equal Justice Under the Law |
10 Nov 2007 01:12:35 AM |
|
|
Sanders Kaufman <bucky@kaufman.net> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4733e799$0$14151$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
Sanders Kaufman <bucky@kaufman.net> wrote:
"Scruffy McScruffovitch" <Scruffy_1@FAM.NET> wrote in message
Not to anyone. The Constitution does not mentioned enhanced
punishments,
only excessive punishments. The two terms are not interchangeable.
It's really disgusting how you low-lifes think that by using a different
word to discribe the same act, you can absolve yourself of sin.
It's not the same act, idiot. You're arguing that a $100 fine is
"cruel and unusual punishment" while the rational people understand
that it's just an enhancement for getting caught breaking traffic
laws too often.
I wasn't aware that we were fining al Quaeda operatives a whopping $100
You're not aware of much, are you? You can't even read.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
