Again, Fred, you won't simply explain 'social abilities' — as far as I can tell you are simply talking about honor, integrity, compassion, and simple manners which are all integral in a civilized society.  What you have not included is respect of other people's views and quite frankly the laws that protect their natural born rights. 

I believe you are under the impression that the government 'rules' and therefore laws can be amended to compel behavior of the unbelievers of socialist utopia.  Nothing could be further from the truth in America.  The Bill of Rights does not grant any rights, it specifically prohibits certain 'rule-making' by the government. 

The government cannot compel the people to speak or not speak, to posses arms or not posses arms, to believe a certain ideology or not believe a certain ideology.  The government has been given no authority to regulate any of that.

All of Fred's socialist dreams, cannot be adopted by the government, they are not authorized to do so.

According to Fred, my "psychotic conventional mindset" precludes me from understanding what is meant by "social abilities" so he won't bother.  Somehow NO ONE understands diplomacy, sincerity, purpose, intention, cooperation, productivity except you alone.  Sheesh, who's the psychotic one.  And socialism is NONE of that.  Socialism is collective power claiming power over the individuals that comprise it.  It is the ultimate cultural appropriation of all.

Classic narcissism.  If you can't define a euphemism, it has no meaning to anyone else.  Your motto is but a string of euphemism's meaning something that only you "alone possess the maturity" to comprehend.  Hence you are powerless, cannot lead anyone to your vision, and are indeed alone. 

It is the law for the government: you may not question the right.  The rights are and forever shall be out of the hands of government.  The Constitution does not grant rights — rights are not from government.  Therefore the law for the government is that the government may not question the right — they are not authorized to do so.  They may question the prohibitions, but the very foundation of the republican government (not a democracy) is that people are born with their rights, and the government's job is to protect them and may not write laws that abridge them.  That is the Bill of Rights.

So it is a violation of the Maine Constitution for an elected official to question whether the people have the right or not — they DO, and always will.  If Maine congress people swear to uphold the Maine Constitution then THEY MAY NOT QUESTION THE RIGHT.  Clear as day.

Do you actually realize that your statement does not say anything?  It is filled with jargon that only you know the meaning of.

"Socialism is the vision of social abilities to create" means nothing.  Socialism is socialism, it is not a vision.  What the heck is a 'social ability'?  And how would one create without social abilities? All of us can create, certainly without socialism.

Your motto means nothing, so repeating it over and over does not change anything.  I bet not even an avowed socialist could interpret it.  You are obviously on your own with this, and there is no way for a fellow socialist to join you.

Bullshit.  There are 100+ million gun owners in America.  All should have had some training and many will develop their marksmen skills throughout their life.  Who are the militia?  The people.  It is the American reponsibility to be armed and ready to defend themselves against thieves and murderers, even if they are government officials laying claim to what is not theirs.

Nonsense, Mick.  Crime is highest in gun-controlled cities.  Heck in England these days, knives and machetes are the tools of the criminals — and gun crime still exists even though guns are illegal.  In the American cities and towns where gun rights are respected, there is very little crime.  Statistics prove over and over again, that an unarmed populace will have higher crime and 'illegal' guns run rampant.  If you want to destroy a city, pass laws that dis-empower the people from taking responsibility for themselves. See NYC, Detroit, Baltimore, SF and other shit-holes.  The government keeps it that way on purpose because victimhood pays off.

Actually, prior to American independence, the King owned all the land in the colonies.  In the British system, no one may own land except the Crown who will grant title to it with conditions, usually a requirement to collect and pay taxes on it.  The Crown may give and may take away because the land is not for sale, it is the King's land, the King's highway, and the King's deer.

For the first time in recent history, a man could lay claim to land, register his land patent, and no one could lay claim to it or tax it, even the government.  This was unheard of throughout Britain and Europe — even today, the Queen owns all the land of every British Commonwealth and it is not for sale, only for lease by title.

I also have not found in the law where a woman could not hold land in allodium.  I think the 'women couldn't own land' argument is based on the understanding of British law at that time.

Provide one example of a people without arms liberating themselves from oppression?  China is literally a slave state.  Hong Kong has been completely disarmed and now have a communist government that they cannot resist.  This is the natural progression of statist rule.  Look at New Zealand, Australia, and Canada — all adopting fascism openly, their citizens locked down with mandates and more coming for every leftist cause now.  If you ever wondered how the German people could allow a Hitler to rise up, you are witnessing the technique right now throughout the Western world.

Just another example that power corrupts when people forget the foundational principles of liberty and the responsibility that comes with it.  The American Revolution threw off the monarchy, but we can never expect that the war is over.  The lust for power will never be completely extinguished and we must forever be on our guard from within our own ranks.  It is war still — if you do not see that, you have already been conquered.

Please understand that the Constitutions do not grant rights!!  They are rules for the governments and specify a few red lines that they may not cross ever.  We the People have many, many, more rights than those enumerated in the Constitution.  

Wrong again, the Constitutions state and federal do not grant rights!  We already HAVE the rights. 

The Constitutions are rule books for the government, and to prohibit governments from restricting those rights — even so far as to say the government may not even question this prohibition because the governments have not been granted the right or power to restrict arms in the hands of the people. 

The state Constitutions are modeled after the federal Constitution, and yes, the US Constitution requires states to observe the restriction as well.

What part of "and this right shall never be questioned" is not clear?

Can this be any clearer?

The press is owned by its advertisers — watch the commercials to learn who is pulling the strings.  Drugs, credit and power.  It is no accident that the entire world has been turned into a hospital and all of us patients under the 'care' (control) and supervision of 'authorities.'  CNN is the perfect example of the true purpose of mainstream media: propaganda.

Hence, Twitter as 'news.'

Classic projection.  Ad hominem redirection.  Not radical.  Conditioned responses of a lost soul to keep it lost.  Most likely a ward of the State.

Please don't ask Fred questions he can't understand,  He merely re-posts the same comments — often 2 or 3 times to correct his posts.  And then it's just ad hominem fallacies. 

I would LOVE an actual dialogue of ideas not personas.  I still am a truth-seeker — even in my golden years — but I have less patience for a loud mouth spewing MSM programming with no intention of mutual understanding.  The Uni-Party is not here to learn, they are here to dominate.

Mike, Fred is going to need to take smaller bites if you want him to understand anything — give him a child's portion, one spoonful at a time.

Tell the truth.

Also, the Ivy League colleges of today were seminaries originally.  The Jesuits can be credited with most of the work on jurisprudence around the world.

"Secular" does not mean atheistic.

And don't forget the Bill of Rights are rules for the government to follow because the rights of humankind cannot be legislated into or out of existence — they are inherent from birth, from our Creator, referred to as Nature's God in the Declaration of Independence.  This is the very foundation of America.

Canonical Law is the root of the British Common Law and American Common Law.  All the legal terminology still in Latin has its origins in the Catholic canonical law. 

The quote is labeled as False.

Hmm, you may well be right.  Where are those scrupulous notes?  I'd definitely be interested in all the details.