tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post5923264524103984167..comments2024-03-28T13:10:44.555-04:00Comments on Iliocentrism: That's all very well ... but you've overlooked somethingIlíonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-80616514772237184822016-03-05T13:17:34.917-05:002016-03-05T13:17:34.917-05:00Drew,
You're a good man ... but you're in...Drew, <br />You're a good man ... but you're in a shitty profession. And so you need to be always on your guard to protect your honor against the pull towards dishonor that lawyering will always inflict upon its practitioners.<br /><br />Lawyering is, and always has been, and always will be, mostly about <i>getting around the law</i>.<br /><br />Now, if a particular law is unjust or Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-24361571115632303752016-03-05T13:07:22.207-05:002016-03-05T13:07:22.207-05:00Drew: ""Uniform rule of naturalization&q...<b>Drew:</b> "<i>"Uniform rule of naturalization" would seem to include defining who does and does not need to naturalize in the first place.</i>"<br /><br />That statement, at least, isn't contrary to the clear meaning of the words, and thus obviously contrary to reason. It's still lawyerly sophistry attempting to wiggle around the <i>spirit of the law</i>.<br /><br Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-4435009779851030382016-03-05T09:53:28.657-05:002016-03-05T09:53:28.657-05:00"Uniform rule of naturalization" would s..."Uniform rule of naturalization" would seem to include defining who does and does not need to naturalize in the first place.Drewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14143205583006210792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-5275185530121902082016-03-05T01:02:49.029-05:002016-03-05T01:02:49.029-05:00^I just realized I should have clarified above, I ...^I just realized I should have clarified above, I meant the hilarious irony was in regards to the incompetency of Congress, not present company (unless you are a member of Congress).Nate Winchesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00630873800235819300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-843131767239111142016-03-04T14:22:05.272-05:002016-03-04T14:22:05.272-05:00I'm just watching this debate with passing int...I'm just watching this debate with passing interest, but it seems like you're saying that the Congress doesn't have a right to issue US birth certificates?<br /><br />TM Lutas (the opposite of a sloppy thinker) I saw recently had this discussion with someone else on another website. I tried editing it a little, but some things specific to the person he was replying to are still in. Nate Winchesterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00630873800235819300noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-74812334883039313262016-03-03T10:40:10.913-05:002016-03-03T10:40:10.913-05:00" I don't know that "uniform rule of..."<i> I don't know that "uniform rule of naturalization" necessarily just includes naturalization ...</i>"<br /><br />On top of my gut response (as witness above), what you *wrote* is pretty much the opposite of what you meant. So, please take this in the spirit of helpful advice in which it is mean: <br /><br />We all need to be more careful -- more precise -- in what we Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-70374119561397544482016-03-03T08:09:24.698-05:002016-03-03T08:09:24.698-05:00"I don't know that "uniform rule of ..."<i>I don't know that "uniform rule of naturalization" necessarily just includes naturalization, as opposed to the whole category of citizenship in general.</i>"<br /><br />This is why people despise lawyers.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-26607822006251308142016-03-03T04:05:09.050-05:002016-03-03T04:05:09.050-05:00I don't know that "uniform rule of natura...I don't know that "uniform rule of naturalization" necessarily just includes naturalization, as opposed to the whole category of citizenship in general. Defining a citizen becomes particularly important, given that the Constitution never does so, and given that even the people who advocate your position cannot typically agree on what a "natural-born citizen" supposedly wasDrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14143205583006210792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-479830240587990195.post-34192063426230223872016-03-01T10:39:09.075-05:002016-03-01T10:39:09.075-05:00Just to be clear, I'm not saying that these la...Just to be clear, I'm not saying that these laws are unconstitutional.<br /><br />What I'm saying is that IF these laws are indeed Constitutional, THEN what they are doing is automatically <i>naturalizing</i> certain classes of persons.<br /><br />But, a <i>naturalized</i> US citizen is Constitutionally prohibited from being either president or vice-president.Ilíonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15339406092961816142noreply@blogger.com