Great post. I agree with some of it.
Will try and remember to reply later or hit me off list with a reminder. Sent from my MOTOBLUR⢠smartphone on AT&T -----Original message----- From: Judah McAuley <ju...@wiredotter.com> To: cf-community <cf-community@houseoffusion.com> Sent: Tue, Mar 30, 2010 19:58:31 GMT+00:00 Subject: Re: _Speaking_of_the_Supreme_Court:_Marine's_father_ord_ere d_to_pay_court_costs_to_Westboro_Baptist_Churc Sadly, that amendment was also poorly worded because it doesn't specify which rights were granted to the States and which to the People. It could be read that the States can do anything they want that isn't explicitly granted to the Federal government and that the only rights of individuals was whatever a particular State didn't bother grabbing yet. Personally, I think this is a bogus reading, given that the Bill of Rights was written in the time people were heavily into Locke and Rousseau and the whole notion of Rights emanating from the People and the Social Compact being formed for common protection and mutual well being. Which basically gets to my fundamental governmental philosophy. All rights are inherent in the individual. That includes the right to free speech, privacy and living your own damned life. People come together to form a Social Compact. The Social Compact is the formation of bodies of Government and Laws for the protection and welfare of the People. Hence I believe that Government, be it State or Federal, has as its primary interest, the well being of People who create it. Making sure that they have food, shelter, health, defense from enemies and equal opportunity of achievement. Then leave the People alone as it doesn't really matter how they pray, what color they are or who they love. Personally, I think that the bitching between State and Federal power is bullshit. Government all has the same job. Sometimes states do a better job, sometimes the federal government does a better job. The size and complexity of both is so far beyond what we had in 1787 that it would be absurd to think that those dudes could plan for what we have now. And as for the Constitution...it is an awesome thing. But it still is not where our Rights emanate from. It is a tool. A remarkably good one, to be certain, but we should not confuse our tools with our job. Cheers, Judah On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 11:44 AM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Right, they are granted to the states or the people respectively. AKA the > 10th Amendment. > > I have no major problem with state and local laws in this arena. > > 4th - you are granted security in your person property and effects, doesn't > mean someone can't look at you. > > 5th - I don't even see how this applies. > > Didn't look to see which is which so I'm going from memory and could have > them out of order. > > The 1st, 2nd and 10th are the ones I'm most concerned with. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:314524 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
