First off, please let me know which points you are responding to with your numbers. Its common curtousy.
7.I would consider them a nation as well.
They were also rebels I agree, but they were a nation.
No "We believe" there. People are endowed with the inalienable right to life and pursuit of happiness. How is shooting someone who is trying to gain for themselves a happier life, believing in the self-evident truths? I agree with you illegal immegration in illegal, and why I don't advocate for complete amnesty. Because, well, they aren't supposed to be here. However, disregarding the constitution and instituting the Arizona Law allowing people to be harrassed based solely on suspicion is not how a civilized society functions.
No jail now? but you said jail them here:
We fine them, but they don't have any real money.
Forcing them to work for several years, we still have to feed, cloth, and shelter them for those years.
Aaaand wrong.
Hmmm. Nope. Nowhere does it say in the passage or entire article that dems want to let them enter freely. I doubt you can find any serious politician that says borders should completly be dismantled. I'm into geo-political unity and I quite firmly beleive that at this stage tearing down borders is a very bad idea.
We are a liberal nation? When did that happen? Basicaly all of the Europeans and most of the American here say that we are right leaning centrists at best. We are not a left leaning nation. As for California, only the densly populated areas are liberal. Back in the seventies there was this one californian politician who was so Anti-Gay that anti-gay people now look like moderates. Plus I think the Birther Queen Orly Taitz is from california. Plus they
do have a conservative governor.
Okay, what if one of the unchangeable rule was one that you disagreed with, say it was giving gays full rights and forcing Christian churches to marry gays. Would you still support the unchangeable nature of said rules?
Okay, no communism, but what about Socialism, or so forth? Any time the government taxes you they are taking your property. However, where in the Constitution or BoR does it give you absolute rights to property?
If there is the right to life, no death penalties either. Unless of course you believe that they can be applied differently to individual cases, they property would no longer be an absolute. Right to life=No abortion or death penalty.
Further question: would the rules stay unchangeable even if there was a 99.9% majority asking for them to be changed? If you still belive they shouldn't be changed, then we no longer have a government by the people and for the people. Hence, Locke says we can revolt.
No one is asking you to like the president. I highly disliked Bush and I would point out to my friends where he was wrong and overstepping his authority, but I never once said a secession would be good or make up baseless lies about him. (Especialy lies that cannot occur, a communist dictator for example. There is no government in a communist society.)
If you cannot respect the holder, then you do not respect the office. Simple as that.
Where did you get the idea that it wasn't a rebellion? The revolting states decided they would leave the Union and form their own government. In the process they attacked Union territory. How is that not a rebellion? Whether or not the CSA was a formal nation is another matter entirely.
What does that have to do with the UN? The UN exists to promote freedom and equality across the world and to prevent war? Do you disagree with that?
Source? Since when has the government prevented you from going into a store?
Errrrrrr. The government has the rights outlined in the Constitution. Among which is the ability to tax as per Section 8.
You are aware that a libertarian society expects people to be rational. No offense, not understanding basic concepts about our government and spouting inaccurate and offensive crap doesn't sound very rational. Please try to emulate the poster Ayn Rand in your posts a bit more. I disagree vehemently with his opinions but at least he knows what he is talking about.
EDIT: Slightly random, but are you aware traditionaly the meaning of Conservative is wanting a large central government that exerts force over people to make them conform? Just letting you know. Look up Klemens von Metternich and the Karlsbad Decrees and learn the origins of your movement.