Thanks for the happy news. (^:
Posted on 09/29/2001 7:44:31 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack
Our ranks have been joined by many as of late, due no doubt, to recent events. As we carry our battle forward, here are a few arrows for your quivers:
"Joe 6-pack's Questions for Liberals:"
1. If, conceding the liberal argument, homosexuality is a genetic predisposition, and a test becomes available to let expectant mothers know if their, "fetus," is predisposed to homosexuality, should that mother be allowed to abort the "fetus," on that basis? If she would abort a "homosexual fetus," does that constitute a "hate crime?" Does preventing her from doing so impose on a woman's right to choose?
2. If we were not meant to eat animals, why are they made out of meat?
3. Suppose you and one other person were shipwrecked on a desert island, not under the jurisdictional law of any state and/ or country. Is it morally right for that person to kill you, or you to kill that person to stretch the food supply? If not, what makes it morally wrong?
4. If sexual activity of any sort is "ok," provided it is between consenting adults, does this include incest between children over 18 and their parents? If not, why? Why not... 17? 16? 15? 14?
5. If the government can arbitrarily set the minimum wage at $5.35 an hour, why not set it at $200.00 an hour? Wouldn't this improve the lot of the poor and lower working class? To what degree should the employer be able to determine the value of labor?
6. If you over-paid a shop owner $20.00 for a new carpet cleaner, would you not expect a refund or credit? Would you consider it theft if the business kept the overpayment without refunding or crediting you? Does not, an anticipated multi-billion dollar surplus indicate an overpayment on the part of the American taxpayer?
7. If your 23-year old daughter had an internship with a major corporation, and had spent her summer on her knees, under the desk of the married CEO, would you demand his resignation, or support his retention because he had been a "good," CEO? What if the CEO lied outright about the incident in a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by your daughter?
8. Is it truly and logically possible to be governed by our consent without ultimately being given the resort of arms? How is it possible that a human can honestly and legitimately consent without owning the means to refuse?
9. What paragraph(s) of the Constitution outline the responsibilities of the Department of Education?
10. If we, as a nation and political system have no moral superiority over nations and governments, why do we spend public monies on maintaining memorials to those that have died in order to preserve and spread our way of life? Should we no longer fund these projects?
11. If reparations for past wrongs can be demanded by the descendants of the victims from the descendants of the perpetrators, should native Americans be named as defendants in law suits against the tobacco industry? If, as many Afro-centrist scholars contend, Ancient Egyptian Civilization was the product of black africans, are not the descendants of Israelite slaves who built the pyramids owed reparations?
12. If one maintains that Darwinian evolutionary theory should be taught as fact, and at the exclusion of all other theories in public schools, one must subscribe to the notion of "survival of the fittest." If one believes that, "survival of the fittest," is a natural, evolutionary process, does the Endangered Species Act set a dangerous precedent in man's interference with nature? Wouldn't the artificially protracted preservation of a species destined for extinction result in an ecological catastrophe?
13. If you knew for a fact that a person was HIV positive, would you allow your teen-ager to have sexual intercourse with that person if they promised to use a condom they got from the school nurse? Would you have intercourse with someone you knew was HIV+, as long as you used a condom?
The things you mentioned would be 'banned' even if the first 10 amendments did not exist because they are not necessary or proper to the execution of the authorized powers of the federal government.
Are you saying that if one is poor one cannot be immoral?
Only the wealthy are immoral?
Wealthy people are immoral because they are wealthy?
What about if and when you ever attain success and become "wealthy?" Will that result in your loss of morality?
Where's that? I know some municipalities have ordinances against self-serve stations. Sounds like a well run, and disciplined business. How do their prices compare to their local competitors that don't provide the same services?
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Now, what does that mean?? It means that if the Consitution does not specifically delegate authority for something to the government, then the government cannot do it. And last time I checked, I saw no Consitutional grounds for a "Federal" Education system. No Federal Education System = no Department of Education. The same would apply to many other federal agencies. However, an argument can be made for the authorization of a Commerce Department being in line with the Commerce clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;).
Now wasnt that easy to understand?
Bryan, are you still visiting DU? (^:
They eat their own young. Anyone who isn't radical Left on abortion, gay rights and the environment is inevitably banned. This includes moderate Democrats. As a result, they're down to about 10 or 12 members who post on a regular basis.
The founding dads should have never gave-in to the anti federalists and adopted a BOR. It has only accomplished the one thing they were trying to avoid, idiots misconstruing the original Constitution.
Thanks for the happy news. (^:
(note the Trent Lott quote in Lazarus' signature line. I cannot yet find any evidence that Trent Lott said that, though lefties are passing it around to each other as if it were gospel. Anyone?)
Thus, even though there is no inalienable right to own toasters protected in the Bill of Rights, we may presume we have this right, unless some basis to revoke it can be made. But since the Federal Toaster Authority is not spelled out in the Constitution (including Amendments), such an agency at the federal level is strictly unconstitutional and therefore illegal.
The only legal ways for such an agency to exist are to have it at the State level, or to amend the Federal Constitution to authorize it at a federal level. Lacking either, we have an unrestricted right to toaster ownership.
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.