tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post4890183691812530162..comments2024-02-02T08:15:38.747-08:00Comments on The Elephant in the Room: Modern Federalism: A Great Compromise - Part I: RightsLMEhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18429716019519498131noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-76839526605054000362012-11-15T10:04:11.244-08:002012-11-15T10:04:11.244-08:00Dara - Thank you so much for choosing to read on, ...Dara - Thank you so much for choosing to read on, and thank you for sharing your opinions.<br /><br />Let it be known, I myself am not a religious man, but I will not ignore history, either. You're absolutely correct in this statement: <br /><br />"Okay, as I've said many, many times before: Whether you like it or not...our Founders WERE God fearing men. Our American rights, as set forth in our Bill of Rights/Constitution have their BASIS in the Biblical (Ten Commandments, which IS LITERALLY set in stone - at the entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court building.)"<br /><br />That being said, I do not want to live under a FEDERAL theocracy... but I also do not want, in any way at all, to impede on the religious freedoms granted and protected in our Constitution. <br /><br />What does that lead to? Well, it's the subject of this series that I'm writing: Modern Federalism - I think, based on what you wrote here, that you'll like it. I can't spill all the beans now because I haven't written it yet, but, as the title implies, I think it's a great compromise, and I think it will give us the most peaceful "best of both worlds" solution.<br /><br />Yes, the Constitution does have in it, a mode for amendments, and yes, I agree, changing the framework of the Constitution should be rare. While our differences grow, it's important to keep the Federal government small and return to our state's rights roots... since, as you put, the Constitution says we must do:<br /><br />"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."<br /><br />I hope you stay tuned. I look forward to expressing my views and hearing yours and everyone else's on how Federalism is truly the compromise we need. Thank you again, Dara. LMEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18429716019519498131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-48467328685682166532012-11-15T09:23:18.288-08:002012-11-15T09:23:18.288-08:00You almost lost me right here: 'Regardless of ...You almost lost me right here: 'Regardless of an individual's religious beliefs or lack thereof, rights are often thought of as a divinely-granted proposition. This, however, couldn't be further from the truth.'<br /><br />But, I'm a reasonable person, so I gave benefit to my doubt - and read on... it IS a great article, but CHANGING America is EXACTLY what Obama and his ilk seek, and I'm NOT on-board with that in any way, shape or form. <br /><br />Okay, as I've said many, many times before: Whether you like it or not...our Founders WERE God fearing men. Our American rights, as set forth in our Bill of Rights/Constitution have their BASIS in the Biblical (Ten Commandments, which IS LITERALLY set in stone - at the entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court building.)<br /><br />They pondered for a long time over WHICH rights were to be the foundation of our new nation (The Federalist Papers) and came together in the end to produce our Constitution. <br /><br />For over TWO Centuries, people from ALL OTHER NATIONS have lined up to taste the Freedoms our Great Nation offers...We're NOT perfect, by any stretch... but, New Media/the Internet/'other countries' concept of what IS and IS NOT a right - SHOULD have ZERO bearing on US, as Americans. <br /><br />While I'm not fond of the 'nation building' concept for other countries... We ARE what we ARE, because/not in spite of our National Principles of basic rights and freedoms.<br /><br />Now that I've ticked a bunch of you off: NO WAY, NO HOW should ANYONE, EVER propose CHANGING our BASIC Constitution, particularly in this anti-American, anti-Colonialist environment. The Founders were wise, and they included an arena for 'modifications' - in the Amendment process.<br /><br />Attempt to change the FRAMEWORK, I believe, WOULD send us into a USSR type system. I also believe that's what the Radical Left has in mind.<br /><br />That said, I believe our Founders foresaw these current upheavals, and subsequent disagreements and they included a ready remedy in the Tenth Amendment: <br /><br />'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.' <br /><br />See: No 'changes' necessary! : )<br /><br />Darahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10612923804586600664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-54703917577742244462012-11-15T06:55:42.513-08:002012-11-15T06:55:42.513-08:00Anonymous - Thank you for stopping by. I just want...Anonymous - Thank you for stopping by. I just want to see if I understand your take:<br /><br />You're warning against becoming a USSR-like system? I think that's what I gathered, but I wanted to make sure. Also, we aren't advocating for more federally-recognized rights; we are just saying, in upcoming analyses, that states should be able to choose the rights they grant.<br /><br />Thanks again... I hope to hear more from you soon.LMEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18429716019519498131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-73837015803671496272012-11-15T06:44:31.979-08:002012-11-15T06:44:31.979-08:00This article is very thought out and well written....This article is very thought out and well written. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04498206443785136768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-51690638114921815152012-11-15T06:22:05.408-08:002012-11-15T06:22:05.408-08:00Let us not start promising additional rights, lest...Let us not start promising additional rights, lest we begin taking us to http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/36cons04.html. The Founding Fathers had it correct.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-48651420638723259572012-11-14T11:56:23.388-08:002012-11-14T11:56:23.388-08:00Good afternoon Slowdownn and RKen! I have to run t...Good afternoon Slowdownn and RKen! I have to run to a meeting in 7 mins, but I wanted to comment. <br /><br />Slowdownn - Thank you for your input, and yes... it's well stated. I definitely think you're seeing the writing on the wall with respect to where this discussion will go, and I'm looking forward to hearing more from you.<br /><br />RKen - I thought for sure you'd be disagreeing a lot. But then again, I'm not surprised... well, kind of. You're incredibly sensible, and you're self described as "liberal" socially. The sensible perception leads me to believe that you would see where I was coming from with this; the social views you have have caused me to expect that you'd be in the boat of "my rights are my rights, damnit!" :-) Looking forward to this discussion going forward with you as well.LMEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18429716019519498131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-49968931529648642242012-11-14T11:33:57.454-08:002012-11-14T11:33:57.454-08:00Slowdownn and LME, very well stated and explained....Slowdownn and LME, very well stated and explained.RKennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-17311912114920059912012-11-14T10:46:48.346-08:002012-11-14T10:46:48.346-08:00I've never thought of it this way. Great point...I've never thought of it this way. Great points! Great writing!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-11419557697328494832012-11-14T10:27:11.117-08:002012-11-14T10:27:11.117-08:00Yes, I agree with slowdown, and I am looking forwa...Yes, I agree with slowdown, and I am looking forward to hearing about how this ties in to federalism and how to move the country along peacefully. THough I think you did a cliffhanger here on purpose, LME? Or was this truly just a preface for an overall argument. MN 4 Ricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1042042552998680556.post-74749944109507951312012-11-14T10:02:00.783-08:002012-11-14T10:02:00.783-08:00I appreciate that the start of this conversation i...I appreciate that the start of this conversation is this brief but impassioned outline of the topic of moral relativism. why? because it speaks to a parallel and related topic, that in my opinion is our main obstacle as a country and as a group of people attempting to live together. the political discourse in the united states is currently approached by each political sphere with one basic premise: we are right. 100%, through and through, unequivocally correct. I don't think this emotion is entirely new, and I think it always would've been difficult to find a politician (or even an average citizen) who would be comfortable publicly admitting that they were wrong about something, but I think that a variety of relatively recent developments have exagerrating this polarized climate. As a country we face some big decisions, that even though detail-wise are between ideologies, can by hyperbolized down to basic arguments about the role of government. Also, the internet has irrevsersibly lead to a fast-paced and incessant exchange of information, along with the ability for small groups of people to rapidly and effectively manipulate that information. This has lead to the media situation we currently have, which is essentially two parallel positive-feedback loops (LME, I think you were hinting at this in your very first paragraph). now that the democrats have fully caricatured the republicans, and vice versa, any action by either side gets fed into this feedback loop, amplified, and exaggerated, and spit back out by the media as a twisted and distored version of itself, leading to deeper and deeper political lines being drawn in the sand. I very much appreciate this introduction, as I believe our government is currently more than anything else hindered by the fact that the political discourse has broken down. legitimate honesty, data-driven discussions and open-mindedness are currently far out of reach in our legislature. instead: political cover, blame games, distortions of reality (lies?), unwillingness to compromise, and games of chicken/prisoner's dilemma are what dominate our political landscape.Slowdownnnnoreply@blogger.com