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

To: YHAOS
I reject your premise that I would not lift a finger to defend the Constitution in any context. When someone on FR says “the Constitution doesn’t mention Science” I would post Article 1, section 8, line 8.

Among the very limited mandates and enumerated powers given to the federal government in the Constitution is the mandate to promote the arts and Sciences, the necessity of a well regulated militia, and promotion of the general welfare; and the enumerated powers and restrictions given to the Federal Government for this were exclusive rights, a provision against infringement on the natural right to bear arms, and the included enumerated powers for promotion of the general welfare.

Just as I would not take a statement from a Conservative that the Constitution has a mandate to ‘promote the general welfare’ to mean they thought the government had unlimited power to carry out this mandate; neither would I take the statement that the Constitution has a mandate to ‘promote the arts and Sciences’ as meaning that the government had unlimited power to carry out that mandate.

I believe in specific and enumerated powers, and the clear meaning of the language of the Constitution (such that ‘public use’ denotes actual public use, and not ‘any conceivable public benefit’; and ‘the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed’ to mean that our right to be armed shall not be infringed).

196 posted on 11/17/2007 9:42:43 AM PST by allmendream ("A Lyger is pretty much my favorite animal."NapoleonD (Hunter 08))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies ]


To: allmendream
I believe in specific and enumerated powers, and the clear meaning of the language of the Constitution (such that ‘public use’ denotes actual public use, and not ‘any conceivable public benefit’; and ‘the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed’ to mean that our right to be armed shall not be infringed).

By George, I think you have it. And that we have something upon which we can agree. Perhaps a good deal more than that upon which we disagree. I think to some considerable degree we may have been talking past each other rather than to each other. I acknowledge my share of the responsibility for that, and I will try to keep in mind that many pose constitutional principles in language somewhat at variance with mine.

On this business of doing one’s own research (msg 194), you were more than a little the innocent bystander in this instance. But, be advised, around here innocent bystanders get caught in the crossfire on a regular basis. And, when researching the Christian influence on the development of our nation, it makes no more sense to consult only atheist websites than it does for Christians to consult only creationist websites when they are researching science,

205 posted on 11/17/2007 11:50:46 AM PST by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | 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