Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Lucky Dog
Our various level of governments have no delegated powers to promote socalled "traditional values".
Nothing in the Constitution can be cited to support this communitarian position.

US Constitution, Preamble
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Are not establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, promoting the general welfare "traditional values?"

They were pretty radical [libertarian] values in the context of their day. I doubt any other traditional government had such values at the time.

Is establishing a constitution which specifies executive, legislative and judicial branches to carry out the traditional values, so specified, supporting them?

There again, our Constitutions structure was a radical [libertarian] departure from any previous attempt at self government.

Which branch of government [at what level] would be empowered to decide what are to be "traditional values"? -- The very idea of trusting any elected official/or branch with such power is a ludicrous dream.

US Constitution, Article I Section 8.
The Congress shall have power to…
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof

Does this answer your question on which branch of government is empowered to decide what are to be "traditional values?"

No.

Try again.

53 posted on 05/16/2006 8:24:46 PM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]


To: tpaine
establishing justice,

They were pretty radical [libertarian] values in the context of their day. I doubt any other traditional government had such values at the time.

Let’s see… establishing justice… I seem to recall something about “an eye for eye” in a document thousands of years older than the US Constitution as a concept of justice. Maybe there was something about that concept of justice addressed in English Common Law or perhaps the Magna Carta or the Mayflower Compact or… Naw… that couldn’t make establishing justice a traditional value, could it?

Careful, your towering intellect is in operation, again.

Is establishing a constitution which specifies executive, legislative and judicial branches to carry out the traditional values, so specified, supporting them?

There again, our Constitutions structure was a radical [libertarian] departure from any previous attempt at self government.

Let’s see… there was democracy invented in Greece a few thousand years earlier, a republic invented in Rome a couple of thousand years earlier, a republic in England about a century earlier, English common law, the Magna Carta, Mayflower Compact, the British Parliament, the Articles of Confederation, the writings of John Locke, the governments and charters of the various colonies prior to the revolution… Yep, according to the “towering intellect,” the US Constitution couldn’t have had a basis in any of those things.

Does this?" [The Congress shall have power to… To make all laws …] answer your question on which branch of government is empowered to decide what are to be "traditional values?"

No.

Try again.


There’s that towering intellect in operation, again… And I didn’t even mention the judicial branch’s power to interpret and apply the law or the executive’s discretion in how and when it enforces those laws. Those activities certainly aren’t based in “traditional values,” are they?

The Constitution prohibits those powers, not Congress or "the government".

… no one is at 'liberty' to commit criminal acts.

In deed, and who is it that determines exactly what is a criminal act? It couldn’t be Congress or the various state legislatures, (government) could it? Naw, a crime is a violation of a legal prohibition, and, according to the “towering intellect,” government can’t “prohibit” anything.

-- You really should study the document a bit more. and history…

If the shoe fits,…
54 posted on 05/17/2006 4:44:52 AM PDT by Lucky Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson