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

To: FredZarguna
for defining the limits of Federal power and was not designed to be applied to the States.

BS. These were 'rights' being expressed, not priviledges the states could do away with on a whim. Not one state would have signed on if this were the case.

My people will not be slaves, and the first step in this direction would be to disarm them. What you and your folks do is your business, but you'd better think long and hard about what you'll impose on my people or my family. I repeat, we will not be slaves.

139 posted on 04/20/2009 9:15:03 PM PDT by budwiesest (Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies ]


To: budwiesest
BS. These were 'rights' being expressed, not priviledges the states could do away with on a whim. Not one state would have signed on if this were the case.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Go and actually read the Constitution.

The States are barely mentioned. At the time of ratification, the States already EACH had their own respective Bill of Rights, and they did not accept that the Federal Constitution would be applied to them--except in the places specifically noted, and to which they specifically assented by ratification.

Make a special note to read the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. These are the Amendments Madison believed to be the most important parts of the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution, and the Tenth Amendment recognizes that no unspecified power belongs to the Federal Government, and that all unspecified power belongs to the States FIRST, and to the people SECOND.

If, after reading this:

Amendment X: 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.

You still cling to the silly idea that the Bill of Rights was intended to extend beyond a limitation of Federal Power, then please trouble yourself to read Amendment XI, the first one passed to repeal a Supreme Court decision which granted the People the power to sue a State:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

And if you still haven't disabused yourself of the ridiculous idea that the Bill of Rights was a limit to Federal power, consider this: at the time of ratification, several States had official STATE RELIGIONS, which the first Amendment forbids the Congress to establish. In fact, there were official State Churches in New England up until the time of the Civil War. The Bill of Rights could forbid Congress from having an official US Church, but it had NO POWER to keep a US State from doing so.

That restriction was not lifted until after the First Amendment was Incorporated by Amendment XIV; after the Civil War.

143 posted on 04/20/2009 10:58:47 PM PDT by FredZarguna (It looks just like a Telefunken U-47. In leather.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | 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