View Poll Results: Do you support single-payer health care?

Voters
109. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    50 45.87%
  • No

    53 48.62%
  • Maybe, if

    6 5.50%
Page 18 of 26 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 252

Thread: Do you support single-payer health care?

  1. #171
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In the land of steers and queers
    Last Seen
    06-03-10 @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,563

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #5

    ...the legislature under this constitution may pass any law which they may think proper


    In the 1st article, 8th section, it is declared, "that 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." In the preamble, the intent of the constitution, among other things, is declared to be to provide for the common defence, and promote the general welfare, and in this clause the power is in express words given to Congress "to provide for the common defence, and general welfare." -- And in the last paragraph of the same section there is an express authority to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution this power. It is therefore evident, that the legislature under this constitution may pass any law which they may think proper.

  2. #172
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In the land of steers and queers
    Last Seen
    06-03-10 @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,563

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Debates in New York Convention on Ratification of the Constitution

    The Hon. Mr. WILLIAMS spoke as follows: In the preamble, the intent of the Constitution, among other things, is declared to be, "to provide for the common defence, and promote the general welfare;" and in the clause under consideration, the power is in express words given to Congress "to provide for the common defence and general welfare." And in the last paragraph of the same section, there is an express authority to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for the carrying into execution this power. It is therefore evident that the legislature, under this Constitution, may pass any law which they may think proper.

  3. #173
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In the land of steers and queers
    Last Seen
    06-03-10 @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,563

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    ...the terms, common defence and general welfare are indefinite, undefinable terms?

    Debates in New York Convention on Ratification of the Constitution

  4. #174
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Quote Originally Posted by Whip Comes Down View Post
    Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #5

    ...the legislature under this constitution may pass any law which they may think proper


    In the 1st article, 8th section, it is declared, "that 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." .... It is therefore evident, that the legislature under this constitution may pass any law which they may think proper.
    Interesting that you did not keep going.

    ...It is therefore evident, that the legislature under this constitution may pass any law which they may think proper. It is true the 9th section restrains their power with respect to certain objects. But these restrictions are very limited, some of them improper, some unimportant, and others not easily understood, as I shall hereafter shew. It has been urged [by the federalist proponents of the Constititon] that the meaning I give to this part of the constitution is not the true one....

    To wit, on 19 JAN 1788, just one month later...
    Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States," amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction.

    Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms "to raise money for the general welfare."

    But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever? For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity, which, as we are reduced to the dilemma of charging either on the authors of the objection or on the authors of the Constitution, we must take the liberty of supposing, had not its origin with the latter
    The Federalist #41

    So much for all that.
    Last edited by Goobieman; 11-20-09 at 01:40 PM.

  5. #175
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In the land of steers and queers
    Last Seen
    06-03-10 @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,563

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    It is as absurd to say, that the power of Congress is limited by these general expressions, "to provide for the common safety, and general welfare," as it would be to say, that it would be limited, had the constitution said they should have power to lay taxes, &c. at will and pleasure. Were this authority given, it might be said, that under it the legislature could not do injustice, or pursue any measures, but such as were calculated to promote the public good, and happiness. For every man, rulers as well as others, are bound by the immutable laws of God and reason, always to will what is right. It is certainly right and fit, that the governors of every people should provide for the common defence and general welfare; every government, therefore, in the world, even the greatest despot, is limited in the exercise of his power. But however just this reasoning may be, it would be found, in practice, a most pitiful restriction. The government would always say, their measures were designed and calculated to promote the public good; and there being no judge between them and the people, the rulers themselves must, and would always, judge for themselves.

    Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #6

  6. #176
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Quote Originally Posted by Whip Comes Down View Post
    It is as absurd to say, that the power of Congress is limited by these general expressions, "to provide for the common safety, and general welfare,"
    Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #6
    This has already been knocked down. Bro.

  7. #177
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In the land of steers and queers
    Last Seen
    06-03-10 @ 12:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,563

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1: Brutus, no. 6


    It will then be matter of opinion, what tends to the general welfare; and the Congress will be the only judges in the matter.

    To provide for the general welfare, is an abstract proposition, which mankind differ in the explanation of.

  8. #178
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Quote Originally Posted by Whip Comes Down View Post
    Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1: Brutus, no. 6


    It will then be matter of opinion, what tends to the general welfare; and the Congress will be the only judges in the matter.

    To provide for the general welfare, is an abstract proposition, which mankind differ in the explanation of.
    This has already been knocked down. Bro.

  9. #179
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Show that it is. What 'authority' am I basing my argument on?
    The interpretation of the SC.


    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Same reasons the liberals have one of the opposite.
    But, that's irrelevant -- regardless of any such tests, the fact remains that judges are not supposed to rule based on their political and personal desires.
    The rule based on the merits as they interpret them. Some are strict constructionists and some are loose constructionists.

  10. #180
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Do you support single-payer health care?

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    The interpretation of the SC.
    When did I do that?

    The rule based on the merits as they interpret them...
    ... which is fine so long as that interpretation is not based on their personal bias. The entire judicial system depends on the lack of bias in its jurists.

Page 18 of 26 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •