Shall be Infringed. A discussion on open carry.

“A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”  The second amendment as written and intended, died years and years ago.  The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government could restrict firearms ownership.  Machine guns now require a federal license.  Fighter jets and tanks are tightly controlled and always unarmed.

Last year, Arkansas passed a law intended to clear up the language in the law allowing carrying a firearm in a vehicle.  It has & is legal to transport if unloaded & the ammo stored separate where it cannot be loaded quickly or easily, and you are on a journey.  (or any other lawful reason to have a firearm) (1)   Poor wording of the revision led many county attorney generals to interpret it as allowing open carry as a constitutional right.  The Arkansas State Police have issued their own opinion that open carry is not legal and they will arrest any and all that make that attempt.

Sadly, I find myself conflicted.  I lean libertarian & want as few laws and restrictions as possible.  I am a strong supporter in the second amendment and especially the right to defend yourself.  But I do not want to see open carry expanded.  Arkansas, along with Texas, South Carolina and  Oklahoma  restricted open carry during the post-Civil war Reconstruction era.  About a dozen states allow open carry of handguns without requiring a permit.  Another dozen allow with a permit similar to a concealed carry permit.  Some states also allow open carry of long guns such as shotguns or rifles.

Notice, I do not ask for any restrictions or new laws be passed in these open carry states.  I simply do not think it wise to push for more open carry.  My concern is it will be used to commit a crime.  Be it a terrorist, foreign or domestic that parades into a crowded event, heavily armed, and attempts a massacre.  Or peaceful protesters, such as in Ferguson, are infiltrated by armed thugs, intent on violence.  If open carry is legal in that state, any attempt by police to ascertain the legality of the armed individuals will be decried racist.  And after blood is shed, they will blame the police for failing to protect the public.

And my fear is some on the left want such an occurrence to promote more restrictive national gun laws.  Ronald Ritchie,(2) the “witness” who reported John Crawford to 911, insisting he was a threat, later recanted his story.  Anti-gun activists are advocating reporting of any open carry. (3) Was John Crawford “Swatted”?

And some will say, why insist on restricting our freedoms on what if’s?  I will agree they have a point.  I will also point out, in the 90’s, a man was wondering “what if” I can get some of my followers to hijack an airplane and fly it into a skyscraper….  So what if we all agree there are threats in today’s world.  What is the best way to combat them while allowing the most freedom?

And just now, a terrorist attack in Paris.  France has very tough gun control laws.  “They were armed with Kalashnikov rifles and are also believed to have had a rocket-propelled grenade.” 

1.  How did they get their weapons?

2.  What other laws would have prevented this?

3.  Would open carry help or hinder the police & government?

(1)  http://media.law.uark.edu/arklawnotes/2014/02/13/open-carry-in-arkansas-an-ambiguous-statute/

(2) http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/07/ohio-black-man-killed-by-police-walmart-doubts-cast-witnesss-account

(3)  https://www.nraila.org/articles/20141003/gun-control-supporters-advocate-swating-of-gun-owners

Advertisements

The Problem with the 2%

Ok, this post was inspired by SUFA’s very own Charlie Stella. It occurs to me that, while this is a political site, we are addressing problems that reach beyond politics, and that some things other than politics are involved in the philosophical discussions we have here. I will be doing two posts along this line. This first one will address the super-rich specifically, and a second will be a more general discussion of issues in our country and culture that are not, in fact caused by nor fixable by, the government or any specific political action, at least not exclusively.

I find it productive in any debate to recognize and accept the truths of your opponent’s argument. If you simply throw the whole argument out, then you damage the credibility of your own, and come off as not listening because, well, you really aren’t. That sort of dogmatic approach will not win over anyone, and it destroys the learning process that debate can, and should, be all about. In most of Charlie’s arguments, there is a reference to the problems of the 2%. While I do not have a philosophical issue with inequality of wealth, I do see where there are major problems caused by some of the most wealthy, and I recognize that, all else being equal, the one with the most capital has a MAJOR advantage.
Jon Smith Begins Discussion on the 2%

Victimless Crime

This is another installment of the differences between Conservative thought and Libertarian thought. One of the big weak points that libertarians have is their stance on drugs and sex and various other vices. Libertarians have been too vocal about those issues for political expediency, and opponents have capitalized on this quite frequently, throwing in a question about drug laws or decency laws and grabbing the sound bite version of the answer. The answer always spells doom for any garnering of support from the conservative camp.
The Latest From Our Resident Libertarian Minded Philosopher

The Path to Safety is Always the Path to Destruction

“People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”

Benjamin Franklin (paraphrased).

This is more than just a political statement. This applies to individuals and societal culture as well. The fear of pain or death destroys the thinking mind, leading to decisions of short term gain that lead to long term destruction. Why is this? Because the violent mind is not always rational, because the fearful mind is never rational, and the power handed over in the name of safety will always attract the corrupt. [Read more…]

Separation of Business and State

Yea, I know this one is not in the Constitution either. But maybe it should have been. The US has a long history of government interference in business and, perhaps even more so, business influence over government. It is one of the main areas of corruption in our government, and while it is worse than it used to be, it is not new. As in the previous article, the main philosophical reasoning for keeping business and state separate is the separation of power. Wealth is power, so is authority. Combining those two is a major magnification of power, and as we all know, power corrupts. Even if an individual can resist the corruption, the fact that a position of such power is available will attract corrupt people to it like flies to syrup.

Our government handed out land to rail companies nearly two centuries ago, they initially backed corrupt CEOs by sending troops to put down worker strikes rather than have the companies be forced to deal with worker demands. More recently they have abused imminent domain to hand out land to companies and handed over billions in taxpayer funds to bail out companies deemed “too big to fail”. All that in addition to consistent subsidies to various companies like the modern railroad companies and corporate farms, massive overspending by the military and other government agencies, and a host of other handouts and tax breaks done with backdoor deals in exchange for campaign support, perks, and perpetuation of power. [Read more…]

Political Reality

This morning you wake up to the first in a two-part series. Which is ironic, because as you wake up to this article you are doing the exact opposite of what the majority of US citizens are doing. This part One is a bit longer than I would have preferred. But that was necessary. There are a ton of political realities that just screamed out to be highlighted. And before we can get to part two, we have to recognize and understand these political realities. Many of you may wish to deny what you read here today. But don’t waste your time trying. Instead, give some serious thought to what you are reading. Because while it may not be happening with the active readers that come to SUFA to exercise their brain each day, the reality is…….

The Great Danger

There is a great danger looming. It will be a turning point in history and decide the future for much of the Western world for the next 1,000 years.

This danger is not economic though the economic crisis may trigger it.
Black Flag Offers a Warning

Objectivism Discussion Continued

Normally, the Thursday night post would be our guest commentary. This week will be a little different. Just A Citizen has been discussing some things with folks over at the Huffington Post. While there he was able to get a guest commentary from someone over there. However, the author is unable to participate here on Friday. Therefore I decided to post the guest commentary on Saturday night. He should be able to check in during Sunday and perhaps throughout the coming week. Instead tonight I will answer some of the comments from the articles presented on Monday and Tuesday of this week based around Atlas Shrugged and Objectivism. I got some comments from folks that my participation was not enough, which is a valid observation. Even if I hadn’t gotten that, I would have wanted to follow up. Those two articles were important to me personally. As such, I wanted to answer some of the thoughts offered. So I will post this thread and throughout the next day or two I will post replies to the article and my comments to those. Please feel free to follow my lead and bring forth any discussions that you wanted to continue.
Click Here to Continue the Rand Discussions

Defending Atlas Shrugged and Objectivism – Part Two

Last night we began this discussion by talking about Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. The fictional novel was based around a philosophy called objectivism. Tonight we resume our discussion by talking about objectivism. I will admit that I am a fan of objectivism. I am a fan because it makes sense to me. Further, in practice, it is the only philosophy that actually has a base in reality. I think  that the most important aspect of what I need to cover this evening will be actually defining and explaining objectivism. It appears that the most common error that I have seen when discussing it is that those who are opposed don’t really understand what Rand was attempting to lay out with objectivist theory. They have a false idea of what it really is. I don’t think that it is simply because people are too dim to understand (although that is true in some cases). I think, instead that the problem comes from the mistake of forming opinions without really attempting to understand and the fact that Rand didn’t necessarily do a great job of covering some of the aspects that were important.
Click Here to See USWs Defense of Objectivism

Defending Atlas Shrugged and Objectivism – Part One

I promised everyone that this particular article would be coming, and as promised, I deliver part one of it to you this evening. I initially thought that this would be a single article. As I began to write, I realized that it could not be. Therefore, I am offering the defense of Atlas Shrugged as part one this evening. Tomorrow, part two will publish and will focus on Objectivism. As many of you are well aware, I am a big fan of the fictional story, Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand. I know that there are plenty of opponents that frequent the site and I have allowed them to take their little shots at my favorite piece of fiction. And I will grant that some of those shots are deserved. But many of them are not. Just as opposed is the philosophy behind the novel, objectivism. What I intend to do this evening is offer my defense of Atlas Shrugged, followed tomorrow by my defense of objectivism. I then open the topic for debate. And I really do open it for debate. I want to hear what others think and debate the ideas honestly. I am never unmovable in my positions. And there are plenty of smart people who frequent SUFA who may just shake my belief tree a little. I guess we will see.
Click Here to Read Part One: A Defense of Atlas Shrugged

Why We are Failing Miserably to Fix America

I had been planning to do this article last week, but simply didn’t find the time to do it the way that I wanted to do it, so it got pushed to tonight. I have found myself increasingly frustrated as I watch the goings on in Washington DC. It isn’t simply because the Dems are in charge and I don’t like what they are doing, although that certainly does play into my frustrations. The GOP is every bit as bad at getting us back to where we need to be. I found that the frustration I was feeling was because what I feel is breaking the back of the American economy is the progressive movement’s continued moves to increase the size and scope of government. The bottom line, no matter what it is that you believe politically, is that we simply cannot afford to do all the things that we are attempting to do. Health care, welfare, extended unemployment benefits, more regulations on top of the regulations that were already not being enforced, two wars that we should no longer be in, stimulus, and pork, pork, and more pork. Our federal government has gotten to the point where they are spending money like Britney Spears. And there doesn’t seem to be a psychotic father to step in and take over control of the finances.
What is the Proper Role of Government?

How Many Really Want Freedom… Follow Up

When I wrote the first part of this article the other night, I thought it an important discussion to have because of the implications in today’s complicated world. I extend the conversation tonight because I still believe this to be true. There were some good discussions yesterday, and I thank everyone for adding their thoughts. With tonight’s continuation I am not really adding much in the way of new ideas. I am instead offering some clarifications and additional thoughts on the comments from yesterday. There were some good thoughts brought up and some interesting questions asked. So I will answer one of the big, important ones in the article and then I will answer some more in the comments that follow. I will begin with a more clear definition of what I am talking about when I say true freedom, as Ray correctly called me on the fact that I didn’t do so, which breaks a rule of mine. If you want to discuss an issue, you have to make your definitions clear so that your point isn’t lost.
A Continuation of Yesterday’s Discussions

How Many REALLY Want Freedom?

I have been thinking a lot lately about the concept of freedom and liberty as it pertains to the discussions that we have here at Stand Up For America. I read the responses that come in to the things that I write. Often I can find plenty of people who are more than willing to agree with me or tell me how wrong I am. But what I have have been attempting to ascertain is the level of commitment that people have to the principles that they espouse on this site. Remember, quite a while ago, I spoke to the idea that some things I would write would be discussions about how things should be while others would be more concerned with dealing with where we really are. Well, what I offer tonight is a bit of a combination of the two. Because in the discussions that we have been having around the way things are, I have begun to feel like the way things should be is not something most are comfortable with.
Freedom is Just Too Hard

Challenging Our Own Premises – Individual Liberty

Another series of articles that I have been planning for some time. What I wanted to do was analyze the different things that we take for granted given our beliefs about what government should or should not be doing. Individual Liberty will be the test challenge to see if this series has potential or whether readers find it to be a waste of time. There is a good reason to challenge our premises. We have several. Most believe that “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” are rights guaranteed to us by natural law, and thus written into the Constitution. Others believe that other things should or shouldn’t be included. Property, for example, seems to be one that gets a challenge. Some believe that health care is a right, equal opportunity is a right, or initiation of violence is a morally corrupt practice under any circumstance. The purpose of the series will be to challenge each of those things people think are given. I will skip health care for now, as we have discussed that one recently. But the others, should you readers want the series to continue, will be covered one at a time. For today, though, we focus on Individual Liberty.
Challenging the Concept of Individual Liberty

Tuesday Night Open Mic for February 23, 2010

We come to open mic not a moment too soon! It seems the topics the last few days have lit a fire behind some people and the discussions have been great. There are obviously some fundamental differences in the starting points for different folks in the conversations. I hope that in the future we have the opportunity to discuss those starting points specifically, rather than lightly flushing them out in order to make a point on something else. For example, the taxes are or aren’t theft discussion is one that I will write about soon and we can have a whole day dedicated to that debate. Should be interesting. For the upcoming few articles I have some plans. Now that I can see Mathius is back among us, I will finish the answer to his post as promised. I will also be starting the series I have been promising. My thought is Thursday night for the Mathius article, unless a guest commentary article shows up in my inbox. And then Sunday night for the beginning of the series. For open mic tonight, I am posting fewer topics initially, simply due to time constraints. So there will only be two to start. But I will add others as time permits. Perhaps not until Wednesday afternoon.
Open Mic

Charity and Sacrifice in a Free Society

With no time to write this evening I offer instead an article I read a while ago on the American Thinker website. We often talk of how the poor suffer in this country. And we obviously differ in our approaches as to how to deal with this situation. Those on the left tend to believe that it is government’s duty to prop up the weakest among us. Those on the right tend to believe in Charity. Black Flag believes government shouldn’t exist and that charity would suffice to solve the problem should the government no longer be in the way. While I don’t share BF’s desire to see zero government, I do share his belief that charity can take care of the issues that plague our poor. There is no need to for a government handout program, which is what welfare has become. I share the article and invite discussion around it because I believe that the article succinctly lays out the consequence of the altruism that today’s politicians bring to bear on the American public.
Rand, Hayek, and Hamilton on Individual Liberty

I Don’t Want to Tame Big Government….

So as you awaken to the beginning of yet another week in today’s America, I offer today a bit of a pep talk, a bit of a rallying cry, and a bit of a further explanation for where I want to go, both personally and with Stand Up For America. I can tell you all that the last 14 months has been a tough time for me. Challenged by many of you, those faithful readers that have digested my daily thoughts, and then took off your kid gloves and smacked me around, I have spent the last 14 months challenging myself. I found that the paradigm that I had been living for so very long….. was not entirely flawless (yeah, I know… Shocker). I found that while I still am smarter than the average bear, I still make mistakes, find contradictions in my conclusions, and stumble as I attempt to find the path to personal freedom, individual liberty, and personal responsibility. My most shocking conclusion (at least most shocking to me) came in my conclusion about government in general.

What I found is that I have absolutely zero interest in taming big government…. I want to kill it.
I Want to Kill It

Better Than Nothing? I Don’t Think So…

After listening to reactions all day to the fact that the Senate is on the verge of passing what is called a “monumental health care bill,” I have come to some conclusions about how delusional the folks who follow the madness have become. First allow me to say that the Dems are correct, it is a monumental bill. A monumental mistake. The more I dig, the more I find what I don’t like. But I do realize that this is simply a stepping stone for them. This gets the foot in the door. Once passed, they will be able to quietly tack on whatever they like on the backside of appropriations bills or stimulus bills or energy bills. They will never again have to wrestle with a “health care” bill. But that is not the topic for tonight. The topic is, instead, the mindset of today’s political pundits and the folks that follow them.
How Voter Mindset Has Killed Our Morality

Laying Down “The Law”

I hope today finds everyone well. Don’t forget, only 16 more shopping days to get out there and get your favorite blogger a Christmas gift! Tonight I am going to be doing something a little bit different in terms of what I offer. This doesn’t fit quite into the category of philosophy or into the category of commentary. But I think it is a good, and important read. I want to offer a bit of wisdom written many years ago, and subsequently translated from French to English. The author is Frederic Bastiat. And the piece that I am going to discuss here is a work called “The Law.” This essay by Bastiat is a brilliant dissertation on, you guessed it, the law. It is available via Amazon and many other avenues. I humbly recommend that everyone pick it up and read it, twice if necessary, until you understand it well. It is short, only 54 pages, and at last check was only $7.95 at Amazon. Such a short book to read, but one with tremendous impact on those that take the time to read it.
Why Everyone Should Read The Law

Where is Our Path Forward?

I was reading through the comments the other night and saw that some have increased their call to action. I feel like this is a good thing and I want to address it. I forget who said it or the exact wording (and going back and finding it again is a time consuming task), but the gist was that we have all of these smart folks gathered here on the site and we are all obviously disheartened with the direction of America. Some are unhappy with the Democrats, some with the Republicans. But I think the majority are unhappy with both, unhappy with the direction of America, unhappy with what life has become here in what is supposed to be the most free country on the planet. And with that unhappiness comes a desire to act, at least for many. I hear the calls to take back Washington. I hear the calls to start a revolution. I am all for a revolution. But a revolution in the right way. Simply going back to “the Founder’s principles” isn’t going to get it done. So what are we to do?
USWeapon’s Thoughts on How to Change America

The False Emotional Appeal of Health Care Reform

Health Care SymbolAs I monitored the comments to yesterday’s article on the public option, I was saddened to see some of the folks who discussed things fall into the common trap of using an emotional appeal in order to attempt to win a debate. Unfortunately, the entire health care reform debate has become little more than an emotional argument along the same lines of so many other political topics and debates. I won’t attempt to say that the GOP arguments are not also just as emotional in their “appeals”. The GOP is just as guilty in this tactic as the Democrats are. I am going to point out a few emotional appeals that are flawed positions from the GOP. And then I am going to delve in to the health care discussions here lately, and point out the emotional appeals. I will also point out where a few of them are fatally flawed. But what I would like to do is point out to everyone that these emotional appeals are quite effective rhetoric, but completely useless against those who use reason and logic as their starting point.
Why Emotional Appeals are the Tool of the Weak

Will 3rd Parties Shake Up Future Races?

3RD_PARTYI was attempting to drown my disappointment with Mountain Dew this evening. The Phillies let me down. Brad Lidge, you are now on my list of guys who should not be a closer. Maybe that is just the disappointment speaking. As a Sawx fan, I certainly find it tough to root for the Yankees. But I would actually be OK with them winning if it weren’t for the fact that A-Rod and Joba Chamberlain will get rings. I would have preferred to see them both never get one. But at least Alex has earned it this year. But a Phillies win would have made it a series! Instead we now have to see three wins in a row to make it happen. Disappointing. So I went on to check on how things are going with the big Governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia. I stumbled across this article and thought, “Hey, let’s take a pulse on the site and see what people think.” They were basically discussing the fact that 3rd parties are having some gain in the current elections and speculating that 3rd parties will have an even bigger impact on the 2010 and 2012 elections.
USWeapon Fills You In On How a Third Party Would Whip them Both

Guest Commentary – Coalition, Evolution, Movement… Is It Time?

guest-commentaryFriday night comes to us again and with it is that wonderful thing we call guest commentary. I have to say how happy I am with the guest commentary submissions that continue to come in. As I have stated in the past, I know how much I enjoy the idea of sharing my thoughts with everyone and debating them. And I want everyone to at some point have the joy of having their work published in the public forum. To that end I hope to eventually have a guest commentary from every single reader here sent to me for publication. If I get overwhelmed with them, I will go to publishing a couple every Friday instead of one! Tonight I offer a piece that was sent to me a couple of months ago. As many of you know I have had so much going on the last several months, I struggled to keep up. So I now ashamedly offer this article long after it was written to run.
Common Man Offers some Ideas

What Happened to Reason and Values in This Country? Part 2

stand-up-for-americaAs I started with on Thursday night, I tonight continue my discussion on the failure of Americans to use reason and values in their decisions regarding the federal government, or for that matter the state governments, local governments, and every other “looked up to” person in the public eye. I do want to note up front that Just A Citizen was correct in his nit-picking of my statement the other day. I tend to say “no values” when what I mean that their values are not in line with freedom or liberty. So let me say up front that when I say no values, I mean that their values are inconsistent with liberty, that their values are inconsistent with mine, and, in my opinion, their values are inconsistent with morality. Defining morality is difficult, so perhaps some of our discussion today will be around that, but I think that those who are trying to really understand what I am saying know what I mean when I say it.
Why Our Society is Crumbling Around Us

What Happened to Reason and Values in This Country? Part 1

stand-up-for-americaI have been sitting around thinking about this subject all day. I knew last night that I was going to write this article. I kind of know what I want to say. And I will hope that it comes out the way that I want it to come out. Let me say up front what I want to accomplish with this piece. I want to set a few things straight for some of the folks that frequent the site. I have had this feeling over the last couple of weeks as I read the comments and discussions that I could not put my finger on. Something just didn’t feel right to me, no matter how detailed some of the responses were or how intelligent the people making them were. So for a couple of weeks I have tried to put my finger on what feels “wrong”. After some introspection, I think I have it figured out. And it isn’t just about the people on this site. It is about people everywhere in this country. It isn’t the left or the right (although lately it has been the left in charge and the left most guilty of forgetting what I am going to talk about). The fact is that the American public needs to wake up and get a grip on the absolute group of morally bankrupt idiots in Washington.
When Did We Trade Values for Ease?

Why I Don’t Care What the World Thinks

stand-up-for-americaTonight I am going to talk briefly about the speech that the President gave today at the United Nations. Then I am going to explain why he is dead wrong and bad for America. I listened to the speech because I wanted to hear what he was going to say to the world. As I have said in the recent past, I am past the point of believing that the President is going to do anything that will make this country, better, stronger, faster than it was before (how many of you recognize that as part of the opening for “The Six Million Dollar Man”? I loved when Steve Austin battled Bigfoot). He has a vision for America. And his vision is horribly wrong. So was George Bush’s vision, for the record. And it is time that we started looking at things the way they are rather than the way the politicians tell us they are. It is time we started remembering why this country came to the greatness that it did, and stop these out of control Washington lunatics from turning it into the economic and industrial wasteland that the majority of the world has become.
WE Are the Beacon for the World for a Reason

Defining Socialism… and Our Discussions

socialism1I have been intrigued a bit to watch the debates unfold between several folks from the left and several folks from the “no government” perspective. What intrigues me is the opportunity to see things from the perspective of someone who believes that socialism is the way to go. It isn’t just an argument that health care, or a single issue, should be one way, but an actual claim that what we have doesn’t work so they are willing to give socialism a shot because they think it would be better for the American people. For those that believe differently, which is a large portion of the readership, I don’t think it is fair to simply say “socialism is bad”, so I think some discussion should follow as to what flaws have led people to that conclusion. Allow me to be clear that I believe that nothing could be further from the truth than the idea that socialism is a good way forward. Socialism is NOT a good idea, and I am going to discuss why….
Why Socialism is NOT the Way Forward

Defining the Greater Good

Greater Good SignI read through yesterday’s comments with some level of fascination. The discussions about the greater good were simply too good to pass up the opportunity to continue them by posting an article with my thoughts on the topic. As many of you may remember, I am a proponent of social darwinsim. I understand that in some people’s eyes, that makes me evil. I can live with that, simply because I reject your definition of evil. I have seen evil in my lifetime. It can take many forms. I saw pure evil in the eyes of men. But the purest evil I know is that which takes the form of a smile as someone tells me they have the right to control another’s destiny in order to serve “the greater good”. So I thought I would write out some thoughts here and merge them with the Atlas Shrugged content that I was going to share. I think the place where many are getting hung up is the idea of true freedom….
The Scam of Serving The Greater Good

Defining What Government Does… or Doesn’t

Government 2 point 0I was reading through the comments on last night’s open mic throughout the day today. Some good stuff there. An interesting discussion with Ray about racism that is forcing me to think hard about my definitions and my perceptions, which is a good thing. I look forward to continuing it. But I was really struck reading the back and forth between BF and Chris Devine concerning government, and the ensuing thoughts that were offered by PeterB. A couple of weeks ago we had a discussion about defining what government is, and why it is important to do so. But this conversation I was witnessing today went a little further than that and I felt it warranted some more discussion amongst us all. If you would like to first review the discussion from the other week, you can do so HERE . There were some interesting discussions. But I want to attempt to refine the conversation, specifically with Chris and BF, as I think differently than both of them…
A Discussion on the Realities of What Government IS

Well Then…. Let’s Just Get it All Out There Part 2

stand-up-for-americaAs I mentioned in part one, I have finally been able to get to reading al of the comments directed to me out there. I am taking the time to answer some of them directly so that we can move forward with a better understanding of what is true for me. In the first part I responded to TexasChem on the ideas of personal freedom and liberty for all persons in the United States, regardless of their religion or sexual orientation. Now I will take the time to address D13, who seemed to question my path forward. The interesting thing is that I am not much different from him, but I think that he has misconstrued my thoughts and ideas. So I want to clear that up and discuss how I view the discussions on this site as three distinctly different ongoing conversations.
Bring on Texan Number Two