Georgio

Why do so many Americans think their Constitution applies to everyone, even although the document itself and the explanation of that document (the federalist papers, especially #’s 51 and 84), clearly state that it applies only to Citizens of the US?

Even the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that constitutional rights do not extend to non-citizens! (Dred Scott v. Sandford,[1] 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857)- Note that this infamous ‘Dred Scott Decision’ was never overturned.)

So why do so many today still think that their ‘constitutional rights’ apply to non-citizens?

I’m posting this question because one of my contacts asked a related question with the caveat that he was looking for specific legal precedents. Unfortunately, although several people offered their opinion, nobody listed any legal documentation to support their answer.

How can it be that so many Americans are so ignorant of their own laws, especially when they are so clearly spelled out in black and white?

I am not a US Citizen, I am a resident alien with a student visa.

I have noticed that in this country, you have more laws than any other country in the world, and the largest percentage of your citizenry imprisoned of any country in the world.

Americans work longer hours than anyone else in the world, are allowed less vacation time, and once all the hidden taxes, fees and licentures are paid, get to keep one of the lowest percentages of their wages of most countries in the world.

You profess freedom of religion, but persecute Muslims.

You profess freedom of speech but give more of that freedom to the rich than the poor.

You profess equality, but some people get benefits that are denied others

And the freedoms which many claim to be protected by your constitution seem to be largely ignored and circumvented by your government-each member of which swore to uphold that contract.

So can anyone explain to me why you think you're 'free'?

I'm looking for a fantasy game, pking or not.

I've cut and pasted a couple of addresses from my address bar into my answers here, and they're a HTML in the preview, but when I submit my answer, the link connect isn't there. I don't understand why.

What am I doing wrong?

It would seem appropriate these days...

Someone said on another one of my questions:

It helps if you understand the distinctions among rights, privileges and powers.

So what are the distinctions?

There have been a lot of votes for best answer I've cast but on the next page with the list of votes still lists my choice as 0% 0votes. Why isn't the vote being counted?

I am not an american, but I am going to School in America and find that there are many things here that make no sense to me

My girlfriend's father says that Income taxes are unconstitutional, and that there is no law saying he has to pay.

If that was true, then why does anyone pay?

Can anyone tell me if there is a law, and where I can find it to show him?

He also says that the government passes illegal laws all the time. This doesn't make sense to me. If the government says you have to do it, isn't it a law?

My professor says that the bi-location of particles is an example of the 'Relativism of simultaneity' but I don't get it. Can you give an example that's easier to understand?

are they trying to avoid scrutiny themselves,

(playing the 'look over there' game,)

or are they vying for attention?

(playing the 'look at me' game)

On a question I recently asked, one poster called another one a crackpot, and cited the following address to verify his criticism:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

Obviously, the comment was intended as an insult, but it had exactly the opposite affect on me. After all, hasn't virtually every revolutionary theory and theorist been called that by their contemporaries?

How many can you list?

Dr Saul wrote:

According to Jorge Carlisle's N-frame proof:

"For any frame of reference, the relationship of temporal dimensions to spatial dimensions is an inverse function dependent on the velocity of that frame. As velocity increases from greater than zero to C, the total potential number of temporal dimensions increases from greater than zero to one, while the potential number of spatial dimensions decreases from less than infinite to 1."

Can anyone tell me who this guy is? What is the math behind his proof?

If both time and space represent two different types of dimensions, and we know that more than one dimension of space exists, isn't it possible that more than one dimension of time exists?

I've been looking for physics references of anyone who has addressed this question, but in all the physics history books I've searched, I don't find any references to the possibility of multiple dimensions of time.

Has anyone else researched this?

Isn't this a logical supposition?

If so, Why hasn't anybody written about it?

according to what what theories?