Posted on 12/18/2009 8:12:25 AM PST by Leisler
Since the dawn of time, one group of people have been manufacturing notions of why they should live better than the mass of 'common, little people, workers, and such'.
Outside you having been convicted of a crime, no one is to be at involuntary service of another. That is, up until now, no one is placed in bondage, servitude, serfdom, soft slavery to another person or company or business. This is what Mitt Romney, ( Harvard Law ) has done in Massachusetts. Of course Mitt, nor any Romney has every fought for freedom.
Mitt is an physical, and philosophical enemy of liberty and freedom and is in fact by a better Obama with accounting skills. He, so he says, would make Obama's, the Democrats/Socialists/Fascists health care trains run on time.
Supreme court will strike down.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
And as the bill currently stands, with no public option, people will have to buy from private health insurers. This is going to be interesting.
Are not we already mandated to buy Medicare?
“Outside you having been convicted of a crime, no one is to be at involuntary service of another. That is, up until now, no one is placed in bondage, servitude, serfdom, soft slavery to another person or company or business.”
Anyone with two functioning brain cells knows that the debt
the US government is running up will need to be paid by someone. We are all (including future generations) being sold into bondage, servitude, serfdom, and soft slavery.
You assume that there are at least 5 justices who actually have read the Constitution. I'm not all that convinced. I know there are 4, but that 5th vote is as predictable as a two-dollar trumpet.
>>>Outside you having been convicted of a crime, no one is to be at involuntary service of another. That is, up until now, no one is placed in bondage, servitude, serfdom, soft slavery to another person or company or business.
So what is your view on conscritption?
It depends on whether those justices have studied
THE CONSTITUTION
or
“Constitutional Law”.
The latter is a study of what judges have said the Constitution means, instead of what it originally actually meant at ratification.
That is a good point. I know that when I was in Law School reading the Constitution was not a requirement of my Constitutional Law classes. I was required to read Supreme Court "Opinions" on what the Constitution said, but at no time were were ever required to read nor were we ever tested on the actual language of the Constitution.
And to open a big ol’ can-o-worms on this one -
the “Constitutional Law” approach is “evolutionary” in nature, putting the wisdom of contemporary man over the wisdom of the original author(s), who based the Constitution on the objective Law of the Word of God.
“Original Intent” assumes that the written word has intrinsic and immutable meaning, and should be applied as such to situations and cases.
[Quote]
Section 8 of The Constitution:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
I think forcing people to buy health insurance is well within the scope of the power of congress.
[Unquote]
Congress can declare war, and thus in an emergency you can have forced conscription.
It’s constitutional.
I’ve read that the mandated insurance requires coverage for things like sex change operations. If that’s true, no wonder the government policy costs so much.
Snort... You mean the same SCOTUS that said McCain-Feingold is Constitutional?
The same SCOTUS that says abortion is Constitutional?
The same SCOTUS that says it's ok for the Government to take your property and give it to another private party?
That SCOTUS?
Grossly wrong.
A law says that you have to pay Smith, or Brown.
Everything you just posted is that the Government demands the money, then it spends it.
Totally different. Different parties, different methods.
After a while, Congress, so that it doesn’t have to be involved, will authorize private companies to tax you.
In short, you will be sold, partly, to private companies.
Supposedly for a service.
Since you have been thus sold, by force, you are, or part of your income, choice, liberties are owned by that company.
Sure they will. Just like they struck down Campaign Finance Reform (thanks you Pres. Bush).
Or good Americans will strike them down....
Lots of unprecedented and unconstitutional stuff going on these days.
Santa is bringing me .223, 7.62 x 39 and 54r and .45 ACP and...
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.