The NEW Bill of Rights

Hoober

Diamond Member
Feb 9, 2001
4,387
37
91

"We, the sensible people of the United States, in an
attempt to help everyone get along, restore some
semblance of justice, avoid any more riots, keep our
nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure
the blessings of debt free liberty to ourselves and
our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one
more time to ordain and establish some common sense
guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden,
delusional and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold
these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of
people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so
dim that they require a Bill of No Rights."

ARTICLE I:

You do not have the right to a new car, big screen
TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if
you can legally acquire them, but no one is
guaranteeing anything.

ARTICLE II:

You do not have the right to never be offended. This
country is based on freedom, and that means freedom
for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the
room, turn the channel, express a different opinion,
etc., but the world is full of idiots, and probably
always will be ... and like the rest of us you need
to simply deal with it.


ARTICLE III: (I like this one!)

You do not have the right to be free from harm. If
you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be
more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to
make you and all your relatives independently
wealthy.


ARTICLE IV:

You do not have the right to free food and housing.
Americans are the most charitable people to be
found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we
are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation
after generation of professional couch potatoes who
achieve nothing more than the creation of another
generation of professional couch potatoes.


ARTICLE V:

You do not have the right to free health care. That
would be nice, but from the looks of public housing,
we're just not interested in public health care.

ARTICLE VI:

You do not have the right to physically harm other
people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or
kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us
want to see you fry in the electric chair.


ARTICLE VII:

You do not have the right to the possessions of
others. If you rob, cheat or coerce away the goods
or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if
the rest of us get together and lock you away in a
place where you still won't have the right to a big
screen color TV, pool tables, weight rooms or a life
of leisure.


ARTICLE VIII:

You don't have the right to a job. All of us sure
want you to have a job, and will gladly help you
along in hard times, but we expect you to take
advantage of the opportunities of part time jobs,
education and vocational training laid before you to
make yourself useful.

ARTICLE IX:

You do not have the right to happiness. Being an
American means that you have the right to PURSUE
happiness -- which by the way, is a lot easier if you
are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws
created by those of you who were confused by the
Bill of Rights,"
 

RedFox1

Senior member
Aug 22, 2000
587
0
76
Amen Hoober!

So what if it's a repost, you have 10,000+ posts Orsorum -- I'm sure you've seen more posts than most. Not everyone is on 24/7. If you've seen it, just move on.

-Russ
 

technogeeky

Golden Member
Dec 13, 2000
1,438
0
0
Originally posted by: RedFox1
Amen Hoober!

So what if it's a repost, you have 10,000+ posts Orsorum -- I'm sure you've seen more posts than most. Not everyone is on 24/7. If you've seen it, just move on.

-Russ


The purpose of saying Repost is to note the fact that this article has existed for a long time.

edit: the Search button works too!
 

Orsorum

Lifer
Dec 26, 2001
27,631
5
81
Originally posted by: RedFox1
Amen Hoober!

So what if it's a repost, you have 10,000+ posts Orsorum -- I'm sure you've seen more posts than most. Not everyone is on 24/7. If you've seen it, just move on.

-Russ

It's not just here that I've seen it (although it has been posted ~40 times or so since I've been here). I've had it emailed to me at least 10 times, not to mention reading it in various journals or magazines.

I actually agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment expressed, I just assume that most people, when posting something they have heard from a website or email, take five seconds to do a search.
 

RedFox1

Senior member
Aug 22, 2000
587
0
76
Hmm, most recent I can find it posted is 7/12/2002. A year ago next Thursday.

-Russ
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,505
3
81
I noticed you do not provide for freedom of speech, religion, association, the press, and privacy.
Is it more important to you to put all those worthless shiftless welfare cheats and people who disagree with
you politically in their place than to deal with the proper balance of the rights of the individual and the power
of the government.

I do not think Jefferson would agree with you.
 

Hoober

Diamond Member
Feb 9, 2001
4,387
37
91
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I noticed you do not provide for freedom of speech, religion, association, the press, and privacy.
Is it more important to you to put all those worthless shiftless welfare cheats and people who disagree with
you politically in their place than to deal with the proper balance of the rights of the individual and the power
of the government.

I do not think Jefferson would agree with you.

Yes, these are my personal opinions. I thought them up last night while sitting on the crapper reading Maxim. I thought I'd force them upon you in an effort to change the world.



rolleye.gif
 

RedFox1

Senior member
Aug 22, 2000
587
0
76
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I noticed you do not provide for freedom of speech, religion, association, the press, and privacy.
Is it more important to you to put all those worthless shiftless welfare cheats and people who disagree with
you politically in their place than to deal with the proper balance of the rights of the individual and the power
of the government.

I do not think Jefferson would agree with you.

Ignoring the thread title...I think the premise of this was that it was supposed to be complementary rather than a replacement for the existing amendments. :) Otherwise yeah it would kind of suck. (I'm sure Jefferson turns in his grave enough as it is)
 

WhiteKnight

Platinum Member
May 21, 2001
2,952
0
0
On the topic of reposts, if it has been an acceptable amount of time don't you think a repost is warranted? I for one enjoyed reading this. I missed it last year and never would have randomly searched for it. Thank you, Hoober.

Don't get me wrong, if someone reposts within a few days or weeks of whatever that's another story.