Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-21-2009, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,971,196 times
Reputation: 1401

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Jeez... the framers didn't recommend an FAA, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Center for Disease Control, or the National Institute of Health for that matter. And, how short sighted for them to forget about putting NASA in the Constitution!
Food and interstate commerce didn't exist in the 18th and 19th century? There was no scarlet fever, smallpox, etc back then?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-21-2009, 12:58 PM
 
1,655 posts, read 3,247,198 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
The framers of the Constitution recommended the inception of the FDA?
Dude, you should read up on some Constitutional history... the commerce clause gives the feds the right to regulate interstate commerce. The necessary and proper clause gives them the right to make laws and regulations to effecutate that power. So, no, in 1787, they did not think of the FDA or EPA or other agencies of that sort. And that is why they made the language so elastic and vague. The argument is over whether the feds have overstepped their power... you are arguing whether they even have that power and that's just an immature argument.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:02 PM
 
1,655 posts, read 3,247,198 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
10th Amendment
LOL... you guys need to give it up... seriously, regardless of what you believe, the law is not as you may wish it... so drawing up wish lists does nobody any good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:05 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,048,770 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
10th Amendment
There is nothing in the 10th Amendment that defines which powers that are not delegated to the Congress as specified in Article I. If you want to argue which powers are or are not delegated to the Congress you will need to look else where, which I am sure that you as a strict constructionist should be well capable of doing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,461,656 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsmoove View Post
LOL... you guys need to give it up... seriously, regardless of what you believe, the law is not as you may wish it... so drawing up wish lists does nobody any good.
The Constitution is something that is interpreted differently...it's why the Supreme Court votes 5-4 on many issues, or 7-2 or 6-3 for that matter. There's usually several justices who don't see it the same way as the others.

It's all political and biased and it's all about interpretation. Don't know about you...but I think that's pretty dangerous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:07 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,461,656 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
There is nothing in the 10th Amendment that defines which powers that are not delegated to the Congress as specified in Article I. If you want to argue which powers are or are not delegated to the Congress you will need to look else where, which I am sure that you as a strict constructionist should be well capable of doing.
No, but it says that the powers that are not given to Congress are reserved for the states and the people.

The powers delegated to Congress are open to interpretation....which seems conflicting at best.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,066,605 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
I'm quite frankly sick to death of the federal government overstepping the limits set forth in the U.S. Constitution.

Things like the EPA, federal gun laws, federal drug laws, etc. Maybe some people in Washington need to do some studying of the 10th Amendment.

Anyhow, what's your take on states' rights and on the federal government's repeated willingess to overstep its boundaries?
I think you should gather all 20-30 people who feel like you do, form a new political party, run for president, and turn this place around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:10 PM
 
1,655 posts, read 3,247,198 times
Reputation: 508
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
It's all political and biased and it's all about interpretation. Don't know about you...but I think that's pretty dangerous.
Well, I don't think it's dangerous; I think it's reality... and if the court goes cuckoo, the Court can be overruled -- just like in the recent Leadbetter case. if you want your laws to remain static and stuck in the 1700s, be my guest. Me? I'd rather that the Constitution be interpreted in line with the evolving society. Anything less is a recipe for revolution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,461,656 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
I think you should gather all 20-30 people who feel like you do, form a new political party, run for president, and turn this place around.
Get the insults going....again....

You know as well as I do that FAR, FAR more than 20-30 people feel this way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2009, 01:13 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,461,656 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by vsmoove View Post
Well, I don't think it's dangerous; I think it's reality... and if the court goes cuckoo, the Court can be overruled -- just like in the recent Leadbetter case. if you want your laws to remain static and stuck in the 1700s, be my guest. Me? I'd rather that the Constitution be interpreted in line with the evolving society. Anything less is a recipe for revolution.
I'd prefer to see more frequent amendments to the Constitution...rather than there being so much discretion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top