Posted on 04/25/2002 9:41:56 AM PDT by Korth
That point has been well refuted, - in the 'squalid' thread for one. The principles of the 14th are being misinterpreted, thus 'used', sure, just as the whole constitution is being used by socialists of both parties.
But the constitution itself, and the 14th, cannot be faulted as 'destroying' anything.
This is hype, by the socialist statists themselves. They wish to discredit the words of the constitution. -- One recently claimed that the 14th is written in some sort of 'code'.
It is written in plain english, and simply says that states cannot write laws that abridge/deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, wihout due process.
The idea that this language somehow 'centralizes power' is looney.
If that were true, then why did it take four years to defeat an army that wasn't there?
Judges use the 14th amendment all the time to go after small towns for puting up Christmas decorations on public property for example.
Grier cited "jure belli", the law of nations as the defense for Lincoln's actions. He punted on the legal issue of secession, stating that "[t]heir right to do so is now being decided by wager of battle. In Texas v White he held that the state of Texas was not a member of the Union.
Are you claiming that Hills Northern Pacific didn't get federally granted right of way?
Wasn't the alternate section grant still in effect?
- 46 posted by tpaine - To 19
IIRC, he did NOT get any fed help, including ROW.
If I Remember Correctly? - How droll.
I can't imagine how Hill built across thousands of miles of unclaimed federal & state lands without right of way grants. Are you guys claiming he paid the government for his right of way?
What force? Lincoln did not initiate armed conflict. The South did. They turned what was a political/legal disagreement into a shooting war, and you can't revise that history.
The idea that this language somehow 'centralizes power' is looney.
That's simply not true and nothing was refuted on that thread.
The 'squalid' thread speaks for itself, regardless of your silly denial.
Judges use the 14th amendment all the time to go after small towns for puting up Christmas decorations on public property for example.
Loony religious fanatics 'go after', in court, other small town loonies who try to dictate public religious displays .
-- What else is new? - This country is full of weirdos, and at times, far to many seem to be posting at FR.
You're so full of sh!t I can smell it up here in Maine.
Were Union soldiers fighting themselves at Chancellorsville?
It is written in plain english, and simply says that states cannot write laws that abridge/deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, wihout due process.
The idea that this language somehow 'centralizes power' is looney.
Gotta agree with you there.
Actually, the states would be allowed to decide these sorts of things if they would Just Say No to federal tax dollars. Fact of the matter is, the states don't give a damn about the 10th Amendment (nor the rest of the Constitution) any more than the feds do. A state that won't say no to federal dollars has no standing to complain about its loss of sovereignty (as if the states are actually complaining...hah).
=Fort Sumter was, unfortunately, the Union's perfect excuse to generate war Between the States. Offers of negotiation from the South were disdained and the fort resupplied by a nation other than that in which the fort resided. Clearly to antagonize the South.
Two things could easily fix this. I feel like I 'm beating a dead horse here but;
1.) Repeal the 17th Amendment and return a political voice to the states as the Founders intended.
Our local talk radio has lately been running (at 5:55 A.M.) the Ted Kennedy/ John McCain dog and pony show. This morning McCainiac was blubbering on about how he was elected "to represent the people of Arizona." I almost befouled my keyboard.
2.)We are not represented in the House, the people's representation.
Anybody who rationally believes that one man can represent the political will of 650,000 constituents is a statist, a useful idiot, or a moron.
Plain and simple, we are not represented today anymore than we were in the government of George III 227 years ago.
REPEAL THE 17TH AMENDMENT!
NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION!
And on the other hand there might have been a second American war, a third American war, a fourth and a fifth. Lenin might have still risen, the cold war might have come about, or worse.
=Fort Sumter was, unfortunately, the Union's perfect excuse to generate war Between the States. Offers of negotiation from the South were disdained and the fort resupplied by a nation other than that in which the fort resided. Clearly to antagonize the South.
Yet Davis still fired. He entered willingly into a war that his own secretary of state warned him was suicidal. Lincoln didn't kill the confederacy, Davis did.
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.