TOTM May 2017- Motivationals II

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Motomom34, May 4, 2017.


Tags:
  1. Motomom34

    Motomom34 Monkey+++

    As I have said before, @Mindgrinder told me not to go down rabbit holes because I would end up schizophrenic. [​IMG]
     
    chelloveck, Ganado and Brokor like this.
  2. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart,Deadman Walking, Snow Monkey Moderator

    Motomom34 and Tully Mars like this.
  3. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Do NOT eat the crumb trails.
     
    Motomom34 and Tully Mars like this.
  4. Pax Mentis

    Pax Mentis Philosopher King |RIP 11-4-2017

    The oath to which the majority here refer is the U.S. Military Oath. One does not take that oath to people, but to the Constitution. The first responsibility in that oath (enlistment or commission) is to "support and defend the Constitution of The United States against all enemies foreign and domestic."...then it gets into obeying orders, etc. It has always been my belief that the first clause is predominant. For example, if those "appointed above you" give orders that are counter to the Constitution, the predominance of the first clause demands that you not obey. The Constitution cannot turn it's back on you...
    [soap]
     
    oldawg, Yard Dart and Tully Mars like this.
  5. Pax Mentis

    Pax Mentis Philosopher King |RIP 11-4-2017

    Yes, once the requirements for amendment are satisfied, the changes become a part of the Constitution...whether I like it or not. For example, there are parts of the 14th amendment that I don't like and that I believe go against the basis of the document...but they are there and will be defended.

    The requirements for amendment are quite stringent, once a proposed amendment passes both houses of congress with at least a 2/3 majority, it must then be approved by 2/3 of the individual states (currently that threshold is 34 states). This was done so that the basic tenets upon which the country was founded cannot be changed by a mere whim of a temporary majority. There must be overwhelming agreement throughout the nation for a basic change.

    As a result of not being confident (or even very hopeful) of making the changes via the amendment process, the Powers That Be have instead revised and expanded government power by "interpreting" the relatively simple English to mean what they wish it said. This usually takes the form of "Well, if the founders were alive today, in view of the obvious changes in society, they would say this instead.".

    OK...off my soap box...I just wasn't sure that you would be that familiar with how our constitution is supposed to work or how it has been perverted.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
    Yard Dart, Tully Mars and BTPost like this.
  6. Motomom34

    Motomom34 Monkey+++

    While I agree with you and understand what you are saying, how many of those in the service understand that? What I am saying is that many join the military for skills, college education, to avoid jail time etc. We know this. We know that some service men are not there to defend the United States, they are there for what they can get. So if a good soldier like you gets orders from a run away POTUS, you and some of your buddies know that POTUS is issuing orders outside of the Constitution, you have a choice. Earlier this month we had people suggest to a SM member to join the military to learn skills. That person would not be the same type of soldier as you. Those people are apt to follow POTUS vs. constitution. What if the Constitution changes?

    Hopefully, I am not aggravating you. I just cannot form my questions/statements properly. Please note: I am not a soldier but at times I get teary-eyed when signing the national anthem. I love my country as much as most who have taken the oath to up-hold Constitution. I wonder how many civilians have asked themselves would they die for their country.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
  7. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    @Motomom34 said, "I have often heard that soldiers may have initially signed up to fight for their country but they end up serving for their "brothers"."
    "Brothers in arms' is the genesis of that, and does not apply to the general population. Even so, the brothers in arms have all taken that oath to the constitution and can be expected to carry on. Then you get the John Kerrys that think otherwise.

    There are the OathKeepers --


    Not many in this day and age, most have never been exposed to an oath worth keeping or a promise that cannot and will not be broken. The draft removed a lot of exposure that was routine 50 years ago. The ideas of impermanence and mutability has pervaded society, the idea being that change is inevitable and will be imposed by some authority (that obviously is in charge) and must be accepted. Take the Bill of Rights and ask how permanent and absolute it is. Then take all the snowflakes and SJWs (Please, as Jack Benny might have said.), and see how society is morphing.
     
  8. Motomom34

    Motomom34 Monkey+++

    So we have lots that said loyalty to God and Country but what about Family?

    63dc68acdfb3aa67313b72b70385f2c2.

    What exactly is your definition of immediate family? Many families have yours, mine, ours children then in-laws, ex's (children's parents), significant others, grandmas & grandpas. Have you ever defined what your immediate family is and who you would provide for if they showed up on your doorstep. See above, the Bible frowns on denying your family.
     
  1. Dunerunner
  2. Dunerunner
  3. Dunerunner
  4. Dunerunner
  5. DKR
  6. Dunerunner
  7. Dunerunner
  8. Dunerunner
  9. Dunerunner
  10. Motomom34
  11. Motomom34
  12. Motomom34
  13. Dunerunner
  14. Dunerunner
  15. Dunerunner
  16. Motomom34
  17. ghrit
  18. Motomom34
  19. DarkLight
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7