"Freedom is the sure possession of those alone
who have the courage to defend it."~Pericles
Please support Free Republic
click the pic
Posted on 05/10/2014 11:00:08 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
Proper application of the Constitution requires finding the original intent of what was written. The 14th Amendment is especially a case in point because it was unfortunately so badly and hastily written. The 14th Amendment is only meant to allow the feds to prohibit state (not individual or business) segregation requirements ("equal protection"). You need to do a non-Progressive-tailored study of the post-civil-war reconstruction period when the 14th Amendment was passed and the opinion of Justice Miller in the Slaughterhouse cases.
Yes, time to take action. The Convention of States proposed by the Citizens for Self-Governance is a good start. From there, individual states need to start becoming financially independent of the feds and let free market capitalism make them rich, like little Hong Kong.
The way I was reading the OP was that Congress,and Congress alone is bound by the First Amendment. All others can do what they want.
I know local goverments are also bound to it (new york, notwithstanding).
If you don’t distinguish between the unconstitutional $4 trillion federal government and the state/local governments which are run by the people of those localities (so far, until the feds take over), then you may unwittingly be part of the problem of acquiescing to the overthrow of our Constitution and the freedoms it protects. Giving the feds power over the states, outside of the limited exceptions specified in the Constitution, is doing just that.
Government at all levels is out of control. The Constitution and Bill of Rights lists our inalienable rights. All levels of government have trod upon them, ALL government.
” it’s with the unauthorized, unconstitutional actions of a rogue $4 trillion federal government that threatens to overturn our freedoms and way of life and turn it into a Collectivist state.”
It is also a problem with state government looking to be a mini Romania under Nicolae Ceausescu or worse.
What was his original wording?
If you apply it to guns you might find out that your State's constitution has a better guarantee than the 2nd Amendment. For example, ND's Constitution says:
ARTICLE I
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
Section 1.
All individuals are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation; pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness; and to keep and bear arms for the defense of their person, family, property, and the state, and for lawful hunting, recreational, and other lawful purposes, which shall not be infringed.
Section 20.
To guard against transgressions of the high powers which we have delegated, we declare that everything in this article is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate.
The 1st Amd. specifically prohibits "congress" from passing sertain classes of laws — so even if it were incorporated against the States it should have no effect… unless you care to explain (a) how the incorporation is a magical process that alters the text, and (b) how such alteration cannot be used as an engine of tyranny.
Most states have 'legislatures' or 'assemblies' as their legislative-body -- I cannot think of a single one which calls theirs a "congress".
Bwahahahaha — on paper, sure.
Reality's a bit different.
Isn't that the political and legal starting point? Knowledge of the Constitution which takes some training and education - what children got in the 1700 and 1800's before the Fabian Progessive Socialist disease began to spread?
In order to use 14th Amendment's incorporation against the states WRT the 1st Amendment you must apply some transformation* to the text of the first amendment itself — that was my point.
* — I do not trust the courts, or any government entity, with the power to transform-and-apply the constitution.
but unlike Bryan Fischer, those hundreds of FReepers (or most of them) don’t have a radio show or column to express their views at length to an audience beyond FR.
In recent times, we have learned that local governments and schools have been making special accommodations to Muslims. Where before, any number of groups would have virulently fought any special accommodations to Christian groups, there is a strange silence regarding Muslims. By its ruling, the courts have now wiped away potentially thousands of lawsuits by religious groups or their opponents regarding prayer or religious services in public meetings or school facilities.
I think the fights now are not whether prayer or religious matters can be considered in Government buildings, but whether one religious group can be excluded while a different religious group can be championed.
remove “people”
‘I find that these shrewd Northern Statesmen have outwitted our Southern men again in the wording of these amendments. They determined when this Constitution was framed to make this a great consolidated National Government of all the people of the States. To secure this object they inserted in its preamble the words ‘We, the People of the United States,’ instead of We, the States.
Their object was to make it a government of a majority of the whole people, that is a Government of the Northern People; for they have this majority; and under such a government holding this power they can and will exercise it oppressively to the South for their own advantage. To prevent this, and to hinder this majority from doing whatever they may think proper for ‘the general welfare,’ which they will construe to mean their own sectional welfare, I wrote the first 20 amendments adopted, and recommended by the Convention of Virginia in these words: ‘Each State in the Union shall respectively retain every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this Constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States, or to the departments of the Federal Government.’
This was intended to secure the rights of the States, and to prevent the exercise of doubtful powers by the Federal Government, but they have omitted it, and substituted for it this equivocal thing to which they have tacked the objectionable and dangerous words of ‘the people.’ ‘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.’ Why did they add, ‘or to the people?’ They determined to make it a consolidated government. They added these words to neutralize the amendment of Virginia, and they have done it effectually. This government cannot last. It will not last a century. We can only get rid of its oppression by a most violent and bloody struggle.”
"Freedom is the sure possession of those alone
who have the courage to defend it."~Pericles
Please support Free Republic
click the pic
I thought it was only the Executive Branch that the Constitution allows to enforce legislative action, and yea verily, it it the Executive Branch and only the Executive Branch, that the Constitution directs to enforce legislation, NOT Congress. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
