- Joined
- Oct 22, 2012
- Messages
- 32,516
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Define health and safety.
Does it just have to be physical or can it also be financial?
what you cannot figure that one out yourself?
Define health and safety.
Does it just have to be physical or can it also be financial?
what you cannot figure that one out yourself?
When it comes to you I would rather not make any assumptions.
Just answer the question, or you know what? Nevermind, It's a waste of my time and class starts again in 10 minutes.
what is that?
Something the federal government was specifically granted when it comes to taxing within the Constitution. While it applies to taxing and spending of tax money, it still can pertain to a type of force, that of taxing people in order to take care of things that are of the general welfare.
wrong, you state general welfare of the people, that is incorrect, ..it is the general welfare..... for the union.
under constitutional law, the federal government duties are external for the union, state powers concern the internal union, deals with the life liberty and property of the people.
none of the powers of congress article 1 section 8 have anything to do with the personal life's of the people.... article 1 section 8 clause 1 is taxes on states,.....not people
The union is "of the people, by the people, and for the people". Hence, I am correct. The union is the people. We are the union. We are our government.
wrong, federal powers are for the external part of the union, state powers are internal, to the union.
as Madison and Hamilton both state that the Constitution of 1788, is a Constitution itself, because it does not grant powers to the federal government to be involved in the lifes liberty and property of the people, and since the federal government does not have that power, it is impossible to violate thew rights of the people.
james madsion-The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.
The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
Things have changed since then. Deal with it.
LOL.
well next time do not quote Constitution when you do not know it..
I know it. I know that you want it to remain as it was 200 years ago when it was written, not recognizing that our founding fathers even recognized that it would change with time. This is why they went vague with the rights guarantees and limited the government, not the people in what rights existed. Some wanted a stronger federal government and some a weaker federal government, with stronger state governments. Since that time, it was shown that states have no compunction about denying rights to people if given less than half a chance.
People decide what rights we have in reality because our rights are based on what we are willing to fight for and what we aren't. That is the simple fact of the matter. If we don't fight for our rights, then the Constitution is honestly just a piece of parchment with pretty words, nothing more. It has no power on its own.
you know very little of constitutional law......
I know quite a bit. While in general, it is those within the court systems right now who battle out the laws and what our rights are, we can change what they decide on. There is a reason that the courts are going slow on the right to marry someone of the same sex despite the fact that the bans/restrictions obviously violate the equal protection clause as it has been applied for the last 40 or 50 years. They know that they need the people to agree to a point.
If the SCOTUS would have said in the 90s that there was a right for same sex couples to enter into marriage, we would have seen an Amendment that specifically banned it instead of DOMA. This is why I call DOMA a lesser of two evils for that time. That is what it was because the support was there for a Constitutional Amendment then, and doing that changes what is a right or isn't. Doing so would have meant almost certainly several more decades of fighting over this issue, in order to get that Amendment repealed (which would eventually have happened, but it would have been much harder).
you know little.
you state rights come from government---- please show be the statute granting "the right to free speech".......
please show me were rights are granted to the people?
Please show me where I've said that. No, what I have said is that it comes from what we are willing to fight for. Freedom of speech doesn't mean crap doodly without someone willing to unhold that right. How would it be a right if you were thrown in jail for speaking against someone (saying something like so and so is an evil person) and no one cared? You get convicted for it but the government doesn't care, doesn't correct or even try to correct such a thing, even with "freedom of speech" written into the Constitution?
[rights and privileges]
rights are negative law, privileges are positive law.
rights are unwritten law, privileges are written law
rights are secured by law........... that thing you call "uphold"
people do not chose there rights, our rights are vast, things you don't even think about are rights.
we do not fight for rights, we institute a government with the power of law to secure them.
we don't tell government i want this particular right ,.....secure it for me.
if people had the power to chose them own rights, they would create rights with violate the rights of others, because man by nature is collective and works to serve his own interest, which is where you get "mob rule"
What nonsense. Those in power choose what are rights and what aren't rights in reality. Here in the US, the people are supposed to hold that power, and the government tries not to do too many major things to piss off the people so that we won't revolt. We also have checks and balances in place to help hold onto rights too.
We can say we have a right to life all we want or a right to marry or a right to freedom of religion, but what do those things really mean? Does it mean that I can believe whatever I want, openly claim any religious beliefs without persecution or even if persecuted/prosecuted for it, I still maintain those beliefs? Is about free will or application of force against me for doing something that should be my right to do?