Above, you admit that "Nevadans might think it's an unalienable right for a woman to make money from her body as she chooses."
No, I admitted that the people of Nevada may have decided that it's an unalienable right for a woman to make money from her body as she chooses.
Specious. -- Begging of the question.
They may also have decided that it's just a privilege. Or, they might have decided that it's just an ordinary (alienable) right.
'Majority will' does not decide what our rights are, hughie. We ALL have the same inalienable rights to life, liberty, & property in every State in this Union.
It's their 10th Amendment right to decide those things.
You imagine the 10th gives a majority the power to decide what are "ordinary (alienable) rights"? - And, -- what are inalienable rights?
You've gone totally bonkers, hughie. -- In effect you are again defending CA's 'power' to 'outlaw' assault weapons
They have the power to either outlaw, or to legalize, prostitution. They've chosen to legalize it, in at least a county or two. Other States have decided to outlaw it. (as we see in West Virginia's code.) Obviously, in those states, they have decided that it's not an unalienable right for a woman to be a prostitute. I'm willing to let states decide these things for themselves.
Yada yada. You are willing to say anything, take any position, to 'teach' your loony statist visons about empowering prohibitory 'laws'.
___________________________________
-- Unable to win your point on booze prohibition, you've switched to insisting that prohibitions on prostitution make your point.
The booze thing is not as straightforward as prostitution, for teaching about 10th Amendment reserved powers. Me changing the subject was for illustration purposes, not because of any supposed inability to win my point. It was also easier to find examples of states outlawing prostitution, than from outlawing liqor, but the principle is the same.
I like to make things as clear as possible for my students.
Hugh, get real. You have no students here at FR. You've become a joke with your illogical, contradictory rants.
States have the power to outlaw liquor production (making moonshine). Have a look at the second section of the 21st: The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. "In violation of the laws thereof" is the key phrase. The laws of the state, are in control here, not the Federal govt. The 21st Amendment clearly gives the states the power to prohibit, or to not prohibit booze. In this way, it is somewhat redundant, because the 10th Amendment already accomplishes that.
The States have the power to regulate "transportation or importation", -- not the individual right to make or use beer/wine/spirits for personal non-commercial use. -- Get your blue nose out of other peoples business hugh. -- And I suggest you think a bit more about the logic of your position.
Rest assured, my position is logical. I'm not the one who confuses the words "regulate" and "outlaw", and forgets ("You can't constitutionally prohibit an "unalienable right for a woman to make money from her body as she chooses"; just as you admitted earlier." - tpaine) that search warrants can be used to enforce laws against prostitution, without violating 4th Amendment rights.
Babble on hughie. Thanks for the entertainment.
"Hugh, get real. You have no students here at FR. You've become a joke with your illogical, contradictory rants." - tpaine
Most FRs are well educated already. I spend the most time with those who need it most. You're one of my most needy pupils.
"'Majority will' does not decide what our rights are, hughie. We ALL have the same inalienable rights to life, liberty, & property in every State in this Union."
In some states, like in WV, you don't have the right to be a prostitute. Is this a violation of inalienable rights? Or was that right taken away by "due process"?