From: cdt@sw.stratus.com (C. D. Tavares)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: No Difference Between the Parties, Part 3
Date: 7 Oct 92 22:59:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Oct7.194503.29415@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, clc5q@hemlock.cs.Virginia.EDU (Clark L. Coleman) writes:
> >Are you truly such a single-issue voter?
> 
> Explain the logic that leads to this conclusion. 

I was responding to something like your SEVENTH post on this one-trick
pony.  It's quite obvious that in the general aggregate behavior of the
parties, Republicans on the average vote pro-gun more often.  Much as
if your main criterion for body work was that Earl Scheib will "paint
ANYTHING for $99.95," I would go out on the limb of assuming that you 
were more impressed by price than by quality.

> I was responding to
> Libertarian demagoguery on the subject of gun control re Democrats and
> Republicans, so I limited myself to that one issue.

Maybe you imagined this demogoguery.  I myself have never heard any claim
that sounds like what you have described.  I admit I may have missed it,
though I certainly haven't missed your responses to wherever you think
it was.

> >Show me a similar rating breakdown on the issues of personal privacy,
> >religious freedom, censorship of adult materials, or equal rights for
> >all non-criminal citizens.
> 
> As you have been arguing about original intent with Mr. Wojcik recently,

You must have me confused with Andy Freeman.  I'm the one who argues 
about the parish priests.

> perhaps you would like to establish that the Democrats come closer to
> the intentions of the Framers of the Constitution than the Republicans
> on these issues.
> 
> Democrats seem to think that a voucher system for education funding is
> a violation of the 1st Amendment's prohibition of an establishment of
> religion, common sense and Supreme Court rulings to the contrary being
> ignored, of course. DO you think the Framers would agree with them, or
> with the Republicans?

Neither.  I think the framers would wonder how the hell the federal
government got into the business of taxing anybody for educational 
programs.  

In any event, you certainly had to reach to find an example even REMOTELY 
associated with "religious liberty" on which the Republicans have taken 
the libertarian side of the aisle.  All you have proven is that even a
blind pig can find an acorn once in a while.  You mention "religious 
liberty" to the average voter, and school choice is NOT going to be 
one of the top five contrasts they give you.

   "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods 
    or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
                                                  -- Thomas Jefferson

   "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is 
    the worst."
                                                  -- Thomas Paine

   "I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor 
    should they be considered patriots.  This is one nation under God."  
                                                  -- George Bush

I don't see any major theo-fascists like Marilyn Quayle, Pat Robertson, 
Donald Wildmon, Phyllis Schlafly, or Pat Buchanan on the Democratic side
of the aisle.  On the other hand, the Dems have Tipper Gore, who is
frightening in her own right.  The question is not which side of the
ledger is clean, but which pan on the balance is heavier.

> Do we have evidence of the Framers fighting anti-pornography laws?

Hogwash.  "Do we have evidence of the framers fighting wife-beating laws?"

Do we have evidence that the Framers EVER intended the federal government
to address pornography or publications in any way, shape, or form?  Absent 
that, the First, Ninth, and Tenth hold sway, and we DO have evidence of how 
they felt about those.

[I seem to remember that old Ben Franklin had quite a tidy stash of that
Classic French Literature ("The Kind Men Like").  I seem to remember he
even tried his hand at writing some things that you shouldn't expect to 
find in your local B Dalton's even today.]

> Did the Framers establish racial quota systems and call them affirmative
> action?

They say that Yankee Doodle "called a feather macaroni," but we really
don't even have evidence of that.

They considered a slave to be as good as three-fifths of a white person
for the purpose of collecting taxes.  Is this a racial quota system?

Was it then the Democrats that opposed and defeated a rather simple 
constitutional amendment that did nothing more outrageous than extend 
to women all the rights currently guaranteed to men?

> These are 3 examples out of hundreds that I could give in which the
> Democrats are out of touch with the Constitution, and the Republicans
> are not, on the very subjects you chose.  Care to substantiate any
> counter-examples?

Done, and done.  I only beg to be allowed to point out once more for
the record that the isolated examples you carefully chose -- in lieu
of merely examining the aggregate average behavior of the two parties
on these selected individual freedoms -- has as much intellectual
validity as me arguing:

"Did George Washington issue presidential regulations prohibiting the 
importation of common firearms under the pretense that they were too 
dangerous to be allowed to the common man?"

> Assertions are wonderful --- the stuff that makes the net go around. I
> have spent time actually tabulating Congressional votes and summarizing
> the results of GOA and NRA ratings, etc.  The Libertarians just continue
> to make unsupported assertions.  

Sort of like the assertion that I'm a Libertarian, I guess.

Since you're arguing about guns and I specifically am not, I'm the guy
who is busting the charter here.  Maybe we should continue this in
alt.politics.constitution or somewhere like that.
-- 

cdt@pdp.sw.stratus.com      --If you believe that I speak for my company,
OR cdt@vos.stratus.com        write today for my special Investors' Packet...
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns