Thanks. All this time, I had the impression that it was more of a "you felt more comfortable with the state governance than with the fed governance" thing but now I see. It's based on what you think is the proper allocation of power. Do you think that Republicans also use this as their basis for lobbying for things like abortion to be controlled by the state? This is interesting.
I guess that my gut reaction (setting aside the idea of what the balance of powers should be) is that, based on history, I would rather the feds take control over almost any issue, than the states. All throughout history, the states have had to be "checked" in some sense - when it comes to the treatment of African-Americans, for example. I don't think that I trust the states to get it right.
Interesting viewpoint,
SC
Quote:
Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst
I am in favor of state control, because even under state control I am guaranteed my basic rights, freedoms, and liberties as I would under the federal government. The states simply have the right to exercise general powers (with several exceptions), whereas the federal government only had limited powers, again reserved only to what was enumerated in the Constitution.
As far as the basis of my understanding of the Constitution and whether it is a personal understanding of the document, I'm not sure where you're coming from. My basis of understanding as opposed to what other basis?
Again, it is as a means of checks and balances to prevent any possible abuse of legislative power while preserving the rights of the people and of the states.
I hope this sums up your post in a nutshell, but as previously mentioned, the states have general powers, while the federal government have limited powers. However, our Constitution includes stopgaps to prevent the state government from overstepping its bounds and arbitraily infringing on the rights of the people. Essentially, what the federal government is doing (exercising general powers) is actually what the state governments should be doing, but not to the point of infringing on our civil liberties, which is what the federal government is doing.
So this issue is all a matter of recognition and respect of our basic human rights through the freedoms and liberties we exercise as allowed by our United States Constitution, the balancing of power between federal and state to preserve such rights and freedoms, and the enforcement of the Constitution to prevent infringement of such rights.
In 2008 the Constitution has been largely disregarded and/or manipulated to serve the federal government's own selfish ends, hence the numerous dilemmas our country is in today. My vote for Ron Paul served as an appeal for someone to actively (not passively or flippantly) restore our government to follow the laws as enumerated in our Constitution. I can say in all but absolute certainty that Obama and McCain has not addressed this core issue to a lot of America's problems at all.
And THAT is my primary point of contention.
You're quite welcome.
KAP
|