Posted on 07/06/2006 11:35:38 AM PDT by GeorgiaDawg
Hi all....
FReepers have been very helpful in the past and I wanted to touch base to see if you could help again.
Our city council is debating putting Sunday alcohol sales on the ballot, yet again. The matter has been defeated twice in the past few years, but they are considering the referendum again.
While I am a believer of seperation of church and state, I also believe in keeping the Sabbath holy....can this be reconciled? I'd appreciate any thoughts or comments on any experience any of you have had with this issue...
Georgia Dawg
Oh, I didn't really think this was an issue, sorry.
Laws banning alcohol sales protect nobody. They only ensure that someone, somewhere, will have a more austere time.
Don't know many drunks, do you? They are, at times, a huge source of pain and danger to individuals and the community.
I never called you any names, please do not include me in your rant. Thank you.
"Wouldn't it be easier to just reinstate Prohibition and be done with the whole mess? "
PLEASE don't give people any ideas about that. The Nanny State at its worst, and some would love it.
Froufrou, -- has it ever occurred to you that government has never been delegated the constitutional power to give "special treatment" to alcohol, tobacco and firearms? Or that what gov't might "want" is unconstitutional?
-- No level of government in the USA is empowered to "LIMIT" or "-- deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law. --" [14th]
As Justice Harlan recognized:
"-- The full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause `cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution.
This `liberty´ is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; -- the freedom of speech, press, and religion; -- the right to keep and bear arms; -- the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on.
It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints, . . .
Prohibitive laws over-regulating alcohol, tobacco and firearms are "substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints".
You sir, are typical of the do whatever feels good psudo-conservatives that are actually closet liberals.
I don't pretend to be a constitutional or, for that matter, any other kind of attorney. What I hear is the inference that our elected officials have lead us down the wrong path on some things, is that about it?
I get your point, and I appreciate the way in which you present it, sans rant. Where I have trouble is the variations between state and federal laws. Some of the posts here seem to suggest that the Constitution and its amendments, as Law of the Land, shall supercede state laws, ergo leaving them moot at the outset.
Bottom line, the 'like it or not' has everything to do with living the letter of the law vs. breaking it. In TX, I believe the wording is something like, "ignorance of the law is no excuse." The word ignorance is here taken to mean "ignoring" the law as well as being unaware of its existence.
I don't pretend to be a constitutional or, for that matter, any other kind of attorney. What I hear is the inference that our elected officials have lead us down the wrong path on some things, is that about it?
Far more that that.. Probably a hundred million people in this country [or more] believe that arbitrary 'limits' and restraints can be imposed on items like booze & guns by any level of government.
This country is in serious constitutional trouble because of these erroneous beliefs.
I get your point, and I appreciate the way in which you present it, sans rant. Where I have trouble is the variations between state and federal laws. Some of the posts here seem to suggest that the Constitution and its amendments, as Law of the Land, shall supercede state laws, ergo leaving them moot at the outset.
Read Article VI, and you'll find that is precisely what it says, here:
"-- This Constitution, ----- shall be the supreme Law of the Land; ---- any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. --"
Bottom line, the 'like it or not' has everything to do with living the letter of the law vs. breaking it. In TX, I believe the wording is something like, "ignorance of the law is no excuse." The word ignorance is here taken to mean "ignoring" the law as well as being unaware of its existence.
We are all empowered to ignore "the letter" of unconstitutional laws, -- by the pledge we all take to support the constitution, -- as it is written.
I can't think of a specific example, but do I understand that if you, tpaine, lived [for example] in a state that had a law in conflict with 'the right to bear arms' that you would feel 'empowered' to ignore said law, owing your first allegiance to the Constitution? Would you think of wire cutters as arms, since they can empower the user to inflict bodily harm? Because they are illegal in my state...bad law, still on the books...
I can't think of a specific example, but do I understand that if you, tpaine, lived [for example] in a state that had a law in conflict with 'the right to bear arms' that you would feel 'empowered' to ignore said law, owing your first allegiance to the Constitution?
Absolutely. -- We are all pledged to support & defend the US Constitution as our supreme law. I took an oath to do that when I joined the Army at 18.
You question this principle?
Would you think of wire cutters as arms, since they can empower the user to inflict bodily harm? Because they are illegal in my state...bad law, still on the books...
?? wire cutters "empower the user to inflict bodily harm"? -- I don't get your point.
Okay all - here's my rub with what our local govt is attempting to do:
The Sunday sales idea was put on a referendum a few years ago and soundly defeated. It was put on again in 2004 and once again defeated (though a closer vote). Now the hospitality industry wants it on there AGAIN. My beef with it is this: Having been voted "no" twice, why are we doing it again and again and again? When is the answer definitive?
I AM also trying to reconcile everything with my beliefs as a Christian to honor the Sabbath. I have come to the conclusion that whatever the law, I am ultimately responsible for my choices on any day of the week.
That being said, I'm still against putting it on the ballot yet again when the issue has been asked and answered.
It is silly for any part of Christianity to push these "blue laws."
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.