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.
You are out of arguments and you never had a point.
I haven't surrendered the argument. You refuse to present any proper refutation. I'm not doing all the work while you sit back and tell me you disagree.
If you think the government is violating the Constitution, you have only several options.
If you can claim the interpretation and application of the Constitution by our representatives is wrong and even illegal, others can certainly claim your own judgement of the government is wrong.
You're free to think what you want about the government. And others are free to think what they want about you.
I haven't surrendered the argument. You refuse to present any proper refutation. I'm not doing all the work while you sit back and tell me you disagree.
If you think the government is violating the Constitution, you have only several options.
If you can claim the interpretation and application of the Constitution by our representatives is wrong and even illegal, others can certainly claim your own judgement of the government is wrong.
You're free to think what you want about the government. And others are free to think what they want about you.
I cited the Constitution to you. There is no higher authority than that.
So you think that the constitution makes the point to compel the federal government to take care of itself?
]
Of course not. That's absurd.
Quote:
This is one of the most absurd things I heard in the long time. What does it mean? Salaries? Office buildings?
Then why did you make it up and say it?
No, it is AUTHORIZATION for Congress to do whatever it thinks it needs for the US Government to function. Remember, these are DELEGATED AUTHORITIES. Congress, then, is granted the power (jointly) to choose what to do, build, hire, pay, etc.... (not the courts or executive branch)
Quote:
No my friend, the "general welfare of the United States" compels the government to take care of the entire country, that's the role of ALL GOVERNMENTS on this planet - to take care of their respective countries
No, it isn't.
It does not say "the general welfare of the people".
It does not say "the general welfare of the states".
The STATES delegated said authority, they did not ask the federal government to take care of them.
Nope. There is nothing like it there. If there was if would have been brought up long time ago.
Nice try but no cigar.
Oh, yes there is.
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
Funny how those educated men who drew up the Constitution confused who "the United States" was over and over within the Constitution.
They even amended the document in such a way as to explicitly distinguish between the federal govenrment, state governments and the individual people, and in doing so, stated "the federal government may not do anything we did not delegate to it in this document".
Yet you state the precise opposite.
I truly believe you have never actually READ the Constitution.
No, it is AUTHORIZATION for Congress to do whatever it thinks it needs for the US Government to function. Remember, these are DELEGATED AUTHORITIES. Congress, then, is granted the power (jointly) to choose what to do, build, hire, pay, etc.... (not the courts or executive branch)
No, it isn't.
It does not say "the general welfare of the people".
It does not say "the general welfare of the states".
The STATES delegated said authority, they did not ask the federal government to take care of them.
Neither does it say "the general welfare of the government" which means it is open to interpretation.
Neither does it say "the general welfare of the government" which means it is open to interpretation.
Yes, it does. And it does so EXPLICITLY.
Quote:
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Who is "the United States"? It is not any of the entities known as the States. It is not the people.
But it is an entity, which is separately named from both. The entity created by the document itself. There is no confusion.
Quote:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
There is no confusion at all.
That general welfare does NOT apply to the people or the states. The 10th Amendment states that emphatically.
Who else is there?
Only the federal government OR your imagination. That's it.
Usually when we mention United States we think of either the entire nation or its representation - the federal government.
Which one you don't understand?
Neither.
But we're not talking about casual conversation.
We're discussing the language and named parties in the Constitution.
The Constitution created an entity which did not exist before, known as the the United States. It was a nation with a government CALLED "the United States" - a legal name. When referring to the borders (geographic area contained within them) is it called "the United States". When it refers to any function or entity, it refers to the federal government, which is named "the United States".
It is not even slightly unclear who is being discussed ANYWHERE in the document.
Unlike your less thoughtful accomplice, who argued that it didn't matter what names were given in the legal contract, you, at least, attempt to stick to the actual names - but keep insisting the name itself conveys a meaning which is variable, based the wishes of the one reading it - such as you want "welfare" to apply to the people - but it is starkly clear that no such application can be made - read the 10th Amendment. The parties are distinct, are clear, and are NEVER confused.
For instance, Article 6 says the following:
Quote:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
It is absolutely clear who the named party known as "the United States" is, and that is the federal government. Unless you're going to claim the authors were dingbats with no discernable intellect and used names without meaning and clarity, your argument is laughable.
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.
