Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is comparible because both state marriage licenses and state driver's licenses are public acts. What part of Article IV, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution are you not capable of comprehending?
If Georgia is not aware that Congress has the constitutional authority to establish standards with regard to state public acts, records, and proceedings, then they are indeed nothing but mental midgets.
A marriage license does not require the same documentation and isn't liable to the type of security leaks the Real ID is. Plus we don't have to carry them with us. And they don't have chips implanted in them.
And now that you mention it, I think the government needs to get out of the marriage business too. We don't need a license to marry.
You obviously did not even read Georgia's objections. If you did and still don't think they are valid, then all I can say is ...
Congress has no right to enact standards for public records that compromise our privacy and security, which is guaranteed in the Constitution.
You are, of course, completely correct. We, as taxpayers, pay for the roads and their maintenace, we purchase our own vehicles, and we pay taxes and registration on those vehicles. So where exactly does this "privilege" come in?
Example: Someone who fails a driving test does not have the privilege of using a highway. They can buy a car, etc. all they want to, but they will not lawfully be able to use that on public roads.
This is not true. You are free to get up, leave your job, and move somewhere else at any time. Nothing is saying "you must stay here or else."
You have a choice. You can live somewhere where you are bound to driving which is a privilege, or you can choose to live somewhere where you are bound to walking (right) or mass transit (right or privilege depending on the place).
This is actually possible. When the government closes a road, you lose the privilege to drive through that area.
There is a fundamental misunderstanding between the court cases provided and the author's... and your... understanding. The courts rule that people have the right to use the highways for personal travel. They do not state that you have the right to drive. They do state that you have the ability, in your right to use a highway, to use a personal automobile on said highway. They do not state that you have a right to drive that automobile period, though.
How much of a "choice" does one have if they can't get a job in a city that will support them? I guess they can just starve and/or become homeless. Are you serious?
The government has no right to put that hardship on citizens.
I did not just talk about the government closing a road. I said that according to your views, the government could legally stop every citizenfrom driving. And furthermore, they could legally do it for no reason at all.
And that is absurd.
So if the government decided on a whim to take away your license for no reason except that they legally can, you would have to sell your house, pray you could get a job that pays all your bills in a city with transit, and move your family across country.
And if you failed, then you and your family starves.
If the government has that right, then we are merely slaves with no voice and no right to determine our own lives.
Again, there are many people in the legal profession that DO argue that driving is a right. Yes, they exist.
If I buy a car, pay for it, pay for insurance, etc ... then where does government get off telling me if I can or can't drive it? (outside of DUI abuse)
A marriage license does not require the same documentation and isn't liable to the type of security leaks the Real ID is. Plus we don't have to carry them with us. And they don't have chips implanted in them.
Scroll back, I explained already how to defeat the RFID chips. Got a hammer?
We are only required to carry our driver's license when operating a motorized vehicle. At all other times, it is not required.
A state issued marriage license is no different than a state issued driver's license. Every state in the union must recognize both, and Congress determines the standard and effects for both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shooting Stars
And now that you mention it, I think the government needs to get out of the marriage business too. We don't need a license to marry.
As long as states issue marriage licenses, they cannot get out of the "marriage business." Where else are you going to get a marriage license that will be recognized in any other state if it is not government issued?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shooting Stars
You obviously did not even read Georgia's objections. If you did and still don't think they are valid, then all I can say is ...
Congress has no right to enact standards for public records that compromise our privacy and security, which is guaranteed in the Constitution.
The only place where the US Constitution "guarantees" anything is under Article IV, Section 4, Clause 1 of the US Constitution:
Quote:
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
You will find no other instance of any "guarantees" anywhere within the US Constitution.
Congress has the constitutional authority to establish ANY standard they want for the purposes of proving state public acts, and the effects they have in each state.
Alaska should stop and impound the vehicle of anyone in Alaska driving a vehicle with Georgia license plates and in possession of a Georgia driver's license. Since you do not wish to comply with the Supreme Law of the Land, we do not have to allow you to drive on our roads or anywhere in our state.
How much of a "choice" does one have if they can't get a job in a city that will support them? I guess they can just starve and/or become homeless. Are you serious?
The government has no right to put that hardship on citizens.
Again, no one is forcing them to stay in said city. They have a multitude of options they can choose from.
Quote:
I did not just talk about the government closing a road. I said that according to your views, the government could legally stop every citizenfrom driving. And furthermore, they could legally do it for no reason at all.
And that is absurd.
Actually it's true, they could do that legally, for instance, by instituting crazy ridiculous driving requirements. They don't do that though because of tremendous public backlash potential. Then there is the whole martial law thing.
Quote:
So if the government decided on a whim to take away your license for no reason except that they legally can, you would have to sell your house, pray you could get a job that pays all your bills in a city with transit, and move your family across country.
And if you failed, then you and your family starves.
See above. The fact that you are arguing this hypothetical situation is pretty ridiculous on it's own. We might as well be arguing what would happen if aliens turned the sky pink.
Quote:
If the government has that right, then we are merely slaves with no voice and no right to determine our own lives.
You're making an illogical leap. They have the right to take away driving privileges, yes. That doesn't mean you are going to sit there and die if that happens to you... you figure out away to work around it. If you don't, that's not anyone else's problem.
Quote:
Again, there are many people in the legal profession that DO argue that driving is a right. Yes, they exist.
There are many people who argue that the world is going to end next week, too.
Quote:
If I buy a car, pay for it, pay for insurance, etc ... then where does government get off telling me if I can or can't drive it? (outside of DUI abuse)
No one is saying you can't drive it period. You just wouldn't be able to use it on public roads. Like I said, someone can buy a car all they want to... but if they failed a driver's test, etc., they won't be able to use it on public roads. That's where this all comes together.
What I bought for breakfast,
the places where I’ve been,
the name of my mother,
it’s all there on your screen.
I’m a straight-edge spiritualist,
peaceful as can be, oh pray
tell why I was flagged so
you’ll detect me two miles away.
Well, little do you know:
I have learnt the science
and microwaved for precisely
five seconds my driver’s license.
You should harass me less,
this should have done the trick.
No beeps and zero privacy, but
one more melted microchip.
Link to source here (shows up wierd but it's from blogspot): [
LOL that reminds me of being in far western Ny state in the southern tier. Got stopped with everyone else on a road... Cop says Lic and regii, then says where have you been and where are you going? I say, Hell I don't know I'm lost, just look at my NH tags....
Then he sys 'You got firearms?' I said that ain't none of your bee's wax. He says 'May I search the vehical?' I say NO Hell NO, and had the keys on my hand and locked the door getting out. He was bummin bad mista'.
(I had no contraband what so ever.) Next thing I said was may I leave now? He said yes...... good thing for him or he would have been facing a NY state Judge.
We are only required to carry our driver's license when operating a motorized vehicle. At all other times, it is not required.
A state issued marriage license is no different than a state issued driver's license. Every state in the union must recognize both, and Congress determines the standard and effects for both.
As long as states issue marriage licenses, they cannot get out of the "marriage business." Where else are you going to get a marriage license that will be recognized in any other state if it is not government issued?
Congress has the constitutional authority to establish ANY standard they want for the purposes of proving state public acts, and the effects they have in each state.
Alaska should stop and impound the vehicle of anyone in Alaska driving a vehicle with Georgia license plates and in possession of a Georgia driver's license. Since you do not wish to comply with the Supreme Law of the Land, we do not have to allow you to drive on our roads or anywhere in our state.
Congress does NOT set the standards for marriage licenses or drivers licenses. The states do. Why do you think there are conflicting laws from state-to-state. Why do you think each state has their own drivers handbook? Some things are legal in some states and illegal in others. Standards for marriage licenses are also different from state-to-state.
When I said government needs to get out of the marriage license business, I meant that there is no need to issue a marriage license at all. A marriage license is a separate document than a marriage certificate. You would have a marriage certificate proving you are married, but a grown adult should not need a freaking license to marry someone. I don't need permission from Big Daddy.
As far as Congress, they have constitutional authority to set standards up to a certain limit. And that limit is invading our privacy and restricting our movement.
Go ahead and ban cars from Georgia from driving in Alaska. I'm not impressed by Alaska. They elected Palin. How's that working for ya? Oh, that's right, she resigned before her term was over.
Since you think the Real ID is so harmless, why don't you spend some time reading all the objections to it in the link below?
And if you are still feeling complacent afterward, I'd like to at least know where you think we will get the $9.9 BILLION from to implement it?
States will just have to fire teachers, police, firemen and close schools, parks and libraries so they can get the high tech equipment and computers and software and people to produce these "enhanced driver licenses" that the DHS wants so badly.
I have no objection to showing ID when asked..... but then i have nothing to hide.
Unfortunately the days of just walking onto a Airoplane here for a internal flight or being taken for who you are just by looking at you has far gone. People are outraged if a baby's buggy is searched at a airport... what a great place to hide weapons if security couldn't search it. People are outraged if they are asked for ID here.... always had to in Florida anyway. People would be far more outraged if their family were harmed because ID was NOT asked for.
I have no objection to showing ID when asked..... but then i have nothing to hide.
Unfortunately the days of just walking onto a Airoplane here for a internal flight or being taken for who you are just by looking at you has far gone. eg People are outraged if a baby's buggy is searched at a airport... what a great place to hide weapons if security couldn't search it. People are outraged if they are asked for ID here.... always had to in Florida anyway. People would be far more outraged if their family were harmed because ID was NOT asked for.
You are from the UK. Your people invented the unreasonable search and seizure practices that our forefathers created laws to protect against.
Law abiding Americans should resist all attempts to track them by the central government (or crown, if you prefer).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
