|
|
#71
10-28-2007, 03:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
None of the Framers of the Constitution would have had any concept that the purpose of government was ever to glorify kings and nobles or enslave the common man. [/ QUOTE ] if by common man you mean other lesser nobles then you are correct otherwise no way. 
|
|
#72
10-28-2007, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
Just how does the Constitution limit the power of government- especially in comparison to the Articles of Confederation? [/ QUOTE ] well it limits how the gov can tax, and it enumerates specific things that feds can spend it on. I'd say that's a pretty big limitation there. add in 9th and 10th amendments (remember, everyone assumed that all the ideas in the bill of rights were so obvious they didn't need to be in the original const.) and it's a slam dunk case closed for limited government. I mean, to argue against limited government is like arguing against seperation of powers and checks and balances, it's a core american value.
|
|
#73
10-28-2007, 05:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
My Constitution was an attempt to make a document that created a hostile environment for facists, socialists, and would-be dictators. That is the central theme of my thoughts.
I haven't thought through every possibility, so my thoughts have some flaws (I'm sure of that). However, in order to create an environment that is hostile to both facists and socialists, there do have to be some regulations...and that is a key point. I'd like an ultimately free utopia, but, as long as we're in the paradigm of the nation-state (or that of having any government at all), we're going to have to have some limitations in order to keep the government in the hands of the people. Yes, people are stupid...bad SC decisions would be made certainly. I do believe that we would be in far better shape overall, though.
|
|
#74
10-28-2007, 06:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
I haven't thought through every possibility, so my thoughts have some flaws (I'm sure of that). However, in order to create an environment that is hostile to both facists and socialists, I propose a fascist constitution ripe for abuse by anyone in power and other demagogues. [/ QUOTE ] Well done.
|
|
#75
10-28-2007, 06:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The purpose of the Constitution is not to limit the government’s power, but rather determine how that power is to be distributed and how it is to operate. [/ QUOTE ] Even if what you say is true, these Amendments were not written by the Constitutional Convention. Try again. this is explicitly shown wrong by the 9th 10th amendments, which are totally ignored today. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#76
10-28-2007, 06:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] None of the Framers of the Constitution would have had any concept that the purpose of government was ever to glorify kings and nobles or enslave the common man. [/ QUOTE ] Was Oliver Cromwell a nobleman? What about Wat Tyler? if by common man you mean other lesser nobles then you are correct otherwise no way. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#77
10-28-2007, 07:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Just how does the Constitution limit the power of government- especially in comparison to the Articles of Confederation? [/ QUOTE ] well it limits how the gov can tax, [/ QUOTE ] Under the Articles of Confederation the national government had no power to tax at all. Thus the Constitution expanded the national government’s power. [ QUOTE ] and it enumerates specific things that feds can spend it on. [/ QUOTE ] Under the Articles of Confederation the national government had very little power to spend money on anything since it had practically no power to raise money to begin with. Again the Constitution expanded the national government’s power. [ QUOTE ] add in 9th and 10th amendments [/ QUOTE ] Neither of which are original to the Constitution and thus didn’t limit the government’s power until they were ratified. [ QUOTE ] (remember, everyone assumed that all the ideas in the bill of rights were so obvious they didn't need to be in the original const.) [/ QUOTE ] Why don’t you learn some history? Even at the Convention some of the delegates express a wish that the document had a bill of rights. The Convention didn’t act because the delegates didn’t want to take the time to debate the issue and some feared that the enumeration of specific rights would imply that the enumerated rights were the only rights we’d have. And then some of the ratifying conventions said that a bill of rights was needed. Consider the resolution of the 1st Congress that proposed the Bill of Rights to the states: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/const/resolu02.htm “The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution:”
|
|
#78
10-28-2007, 08:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
Was Oliver Cromwell a nobleman? What about Wat Tyler? if by common man you mean other lesser nobles then you are correct otherwise no way. [/ QUOTE ] until very recently a nobleman could only be tried for crimes before the house of lords or a jury composed of other noblemen or something. that's the *flavor* of what I was saying.
|
|
#79
10-28-2007, 11:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Was Oliver Cromwell a nobleman? What about Wat Tyler? if by common man you mean other lesser nobles then you are correct otherwise no way. [/ QUOTE ] until very recently a nobleman could only be tried for crimes before the house of lords or a jury composed of other noblemen or something. that's the *flavor* of what I was saying. [/ QUOTE ] This isn't trial by jury of the nobleman's peers? What's your point?
|
|
#80
10-28-2007, 11:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (Re)Writing a New Constitution
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I haven't thought through every possibility, so my thoughts have some flaws (I'm sure of that). However, in order to create an environment that is hostile to both facists and socialists, I propose a fascist constitution ripe for abuse by anyone in power and other demagogues. [/ QUOTE ] Well done. [/ QUOTE ] It it's impossible to control the media, impossible to greatly influence elections, etc., with money...how does that help fascism? Fascism is when ecomomic power "owns" the government whereas socialism is the opposite.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
