View Single Post
  #173 (permalink)  
Old 07-23-2008, 10:04 PM
Chan's Avatar
Chan Chan is offline
Congressman
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Userid: 133
Location: Buffalo, New York, USA
Posts: 5,500
Rep Power: 7
Chan has a spectacular aura aboutChan has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skerlnik View Post
And, that'd be fine. I think the whole dang thing probably needs a re-write and serious updating, anyway.
Then let's re-write it!

Quote:
Our laws need to work for us, not against us. We can make our own laws say anything we need to: I don't share the opinion that the Constitution was decreed by God and completely immutable. Clarification, updating and revision is essential to a healthy body of law.
But what you're not understanding here is the intended, very limited, role of the federal government. The issue here is the role of the federal government. If the people want the federal government to have more power than the Constitution gives it then they must either amend the Constitution or replace it with a new document.

Quote:
I happen to think things like the CDC, the FDA, USDA, and other agencies are quite important, and very much government's (society's) responsibility. If we get to the point where we are letting technicalities of our own Constitution hamstring what the people want their government to do, I think this is a bad thing. Government needs to be able to be responsive to the desires of the people, otherwise it's rather pointless.
It doesn't matter whether they're important, it matters whether they're Constitutional. They're not. The founders rightly put a process in place for the people to amend the Constitution as necessary. So, if the people want the federal government to have the power to establish agencies like the CDC, FDA and USDA, they need to amend the Constitution or replace it with a new document. FOLLOW THE DAMNED PROCESS!

Quote:
But, I have always been perhaps more open to radical change than most people. If the 9th and 10 have been rendered pointless by established historical precident, then, perhaps it's time to revoke them, or clarify them.
I don't have a problem if the people replace the Constitution with an entirely new document. I do, however, care about the federal government usurping for itself powers the Constitution (and, by extension, the people) didn't give it.

Quote:
Now, don't you take what I've said to illogial extremes and say that I want to pitch the Constitution out entirely.......
Again, if the people want to do that, I don't have a problem with it. But it must be the people that do it and not the federal government.
__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Reply With Quote