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.
Yeah, wingnuts LOVE to reference the U.S. Constitution, but conveniently IGNORE the parts they don't like. Another example: The Constitution enshrines the right of citizens to own guns - fair enough. But the wingnuts conveniently IGNORE the REASON:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
The REASON for maintaining the RIGHT to bear arms was not so every idiot out there could have a gun collection or go hunting or even deter criminals - it was SO THAT HE/SHE WOULD BE PART OF A WELL REGULATED MILITIA available in times of war. Somehow THAT part is COMPLETELY IGNORED by the wingnuts. Based on a LITERAL interpretation of the Constitution it could be argued that ONLY THOSE who are part of A WELL REGULATED MILITIA (as for example the National Guard) should be allowed to own guns - but wingnuts somehow choose to not take THAT part of the Constitution LITERALLY.
As I said, they pick and choose what parts of the Constitution they wish to enshrine and what parts they choose to ignore.
Ken
Thank you so much for your very intelligent explanation of what the Founding Fathers meant.
I mean who should we listen YOU or men like Thomas Jefferson?
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
> Thomas Jefferson
I know, he didn't know what he was talking about.when he wrote the Declaration of Independence!
10th Amendment: "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"
Except that "PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE" and "ENSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY" WAS specifically delegated to the U.S. by the CONSTITUTION - right there in the PREAMBLE.
"smack:
The US Supreme Court has had NUMEROUS chances to strike down such welfare laws - and yet they are still in place.
Why?
Because the US Constitution specifically says it's the Federal domain to "PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE" and "ENSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY".
Too bad you don't like that, but until YOU become a Supreme Court Justice, your opinion on the subject is not important.
Ken
So, you are now claiming that the Supreme Court is infallible?
Remember at 1 time they ruled that blacks were only 1/3 of a man.
YOu do realize that the constitution is not a bible, right? The constitution was more suitable back when the country was formed, but today, not as much.
Sure, the idea of personal freedom and limits on governments power is sooooo old school.
If YOU need a nanny, go for it, but don't drag me down with you.
The constitution was more suitable back when the country was formed, but today, not as much.
This is what's wrong with this country today. Many of the problems and issues we face can be boiled down to the attitude demonstrated above.
Sandmister, if you don't believe that the Constitution is applicable today, you're welcome to start taking the appropriate steps to have it changed. Until that happens, you have two options - accept the reality that it is our governing document, or leave and find a country you believe to be more suitable for you.
Your OWN red highlighting, "PROMOTE the general welfare.
Promoting is NOT PROVIDING.
Ah ha ha ha yes exactly. The Constitution explicitly gave the Federal government the power to verbally encourage people to have greater welfare or something, without doing anything about it. That makes perfect sense.
No, "promote" doesn't just mean advertising, like a commercial promo.
Entitlements are expensive ...please save that nonsense for the other threads.
Entitlements are not only expensive, but damaging to the young generation. Many are now paying for these entitlements. Some don't know that they are paying it in so many ways. For instance,e college tuition is raised so that tax payers have to fund pensions promised way back in good times. So the young are paying for these entitlements as they pay for college. It's as if there isn't enough financial hurdles for them.
They are also told to do what they love, which often translates into poverty. Who told them that?
Ah ha ha ha yes exactly. The Constitution explicitly gave the Federal government the power to verbally encourage people to have greater welfare or something, without doing anything about it. That makes perfect sense.
No, "promote" doesn't just mean advertising, like a commercial promo.
welfare is an ambiguous word. In many contexts, it simply means well being. It has nothing to do with social programs and services.
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.
