And if I may boil this entire debate down to a simple point, it would be that I do not agree with the courts, or their interpretation of the Constitution. I'm not a lawyer or a Constitutional scholar -- I know that many men of good conscience have mulled over these issues through the years. Some have reached conclusions similar to yours, and some have reached conclusions similar to mine.
You actually seem to have a much better grasp of history and Constitutional law than many of the people debating with you give you credit for. I simply disagree with your conclusions, and prefer a much more libertarian application of law.
My view is that the Founders were saying something like this: "Let's design a box. Inside this box, government will exist. Everything outside this box cannot and shall not be touched by government. Let's name some specific instances of things government shall not touch, just to be clear about it. But remember these are only examples -- ideally government shall not touch anything outside this box."
Technically, the "government" they would have been referring to was the federal government, because that's what the Constitution was specifically addressing. But by logical extension, my libertarian preference is that the State governments exist inside boxes that are even smaller and less intrusive than the federal government box, and contain the same explicitly named limitations as the federal box, as a baseline minimum.
And extending this silly little analogy ad nauseam, I believe that today, we find that the government that was placed inside that box looks a lot like The Blob (the monster from all those old movies). It has escaped from the box, is invading everywhere, and is entangled in places it never should have been. Its enablers and accomplices have been many, and they are not necessarily conspiratorially involved -- but for whatever reason, they allowed it to escape, and it continues to grow.
I understand that this is a very "philosophical" analogy, that has a limited relationship to the reality of legal issues, but I think it at least provides an overview of how I view the role of government as intended vs. the role of government as practiced.
Well, that's just the opposite of federalism. The Founding Fathers believed the states to be much more powerful than than the federal government -- the powers given to the newly formed federal government were "few and defined".
The Founders believed it much easier to control their own state than some government body hundreds of miles away; therefore, they weren't concerned about the power given to their own state.
The U.S. Supreme Court today dictates how we live our lives, not the state in which we live. The USSC is the entitity that says our kids can't pray in school, can't display religious symbols, can't even dicuss political issues 30 days before an election!, must allow abortion, must allow sodomy, on and on.
Where do I go, Ryan Spock, to raise my kids the way I want? What state offers me the kind of life I want to live? Where's MY freedom, Ryan Spock?