[SCA-AE] OT Constitutional law was Some persona help needed
welshborderer at yahoo.com
Sat Apr 1 01:55:10 EST 2006
To cover the legal expenses, yes.
I guess I should ahve been a bit more clear as to my
My meaning was such a fight would tend to tarnish the
reputation of the society. which, while not as
"fringe' as it was when I first joined 25 years ago,
is still a bit on the fringe.
Just remember the hack job "Unsolved Mysteries" did on
us some time ago.
"To limit the power of Government?"
Geeze, you mean it's still legal to say that in
public? Can they still teach that in schools?
Okay, okay... <sarcasm mode off>
Yep, that's what the Constitution and the Bill or
Rights is there for. Not to "reign in the rights of
the people" as a a politician at the *high* federal
level said during the end of the last century /
Alright. I'm getting off my soapbox now.
--- "Michael B. Greenstein" <greenstein at earthlink.net>
> >Both cases were tossed out, but still... do we want
> >risk havign to go to court to fight any kind of 1st
> >Amendment charge to begin with?
> Isn't that one of the main reasons why something
> like 10,000 people pay $35 a year to a California
> The SCA only pretends to be a government. It cannot
> infringe your Constitutional rights, any more than
> can I, or the fellow coming from across the street
> with the pickaxe and the lopsided grin. The
> Constitution is a limitation upon the power of
> >My personal feelings are if you want to do a
> >clerical persona, great.
> - Michael
> Sca-aethelmearc mailing list
> Send mail to discussion at aethelmearc.org to post to
> the list.
> more info, archives, subscription changes, etc.
> Please edit your posts to remove excess quotage.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
More information about the Sca-aethelmearc