Posted on 06/29/2003 3:08:19 PM PDT by ex-snook
Morality happens to be the focus of the Texas decision but the SC removing legislation from the Legislature is the problem.
But sad to say but I have never heard any mention of it in my parish. If the Religious do not speak out what can one expect from politicians? Sort of like 'shacking up', over time, when it's not condemned, it's accepted.
Indeed they have. But it's going to have to get shockingly bad to get Joe and Jane Six-Pack to get their minds off American Idol and MTV and back to paying attention to their civic duty. I thought 9-11 would have awakened the sleeping, stupid, apathetic majority of our society, but I was wrong. What it will take is a matter of debate, but it will be dreadful, either way. Nonetheless, I hope whatever's gonna happen happens soon, 'cause this long, slow, decline is way too painful.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
You snipped that and took it completely out of contex. What you snipped says:
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,
That's not talking about a certain law, its about the government in general.
Not at all. I think you misunderstand the Declaration of Independence. The authors stated that their present government, the Crown of England, had become "destructive to these ends". Then they implemented their change by revolution. The DOI isn't talking about politics, legislation or voting.
Yes, but I'm trying to get you to say why you think that
You objected to my criticism of the court, instead of the people, changing the form of government. But you have not said why you do.
Oh, that's your argument? The court didn't change the form of government. If you are gong to use that argument, then maybe you should point to the first instance the SCOTUS knocked down a State law, and I guarantee you, it was much longer than 30 years ago.
OH?
Your belief that the meaning of the Constitution can be changed without changing the form of government is new and abhorent to me.
Of course the belief that the Constitution can be changed without amendment is a very popular one. Everyone thinks they will get what they want.
The meaning of the Constitution was changed well over 100 years ago. Its ridiculous for you, or anyone else, to act like the sole incident of the SCOTUS knocking down an irrelevant, hardly-ever enforced law somehow "changed our form of government" or "changed the meaning of the Constitution" considering 100+ years of SCOTUS decisions and un-challenged federal legislation that is in place. Its hilarious, that considering FEDERAL usurption of rights like Social Security, the progressive income tax system, federal gun laws, federal drug laws, environmental laws, trade treaties etc, that people would claim this one decision has destroyed America. Frankly, people who make such arguments look like knee-jerk reactionists - not unlike the "left" who we make so much fun of.
You have a very good point, though, that this is not a new fight.
Buck up, defeatism 'never won fair' right.
People who oppose court usurpation are not your enemy, even if they do so on a matter you think not important.
Yes that is the point. The Constitution design was three separate branches for balance. The usurpation by one is beyond the original design. Executive usurpation would also be dictatorship and also a breach.
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.