Ruth, excellent response and post. I disagree only with your 2d Amend. analysis. Gun ownership by the individual is fundamental to this country; in the last few years many constitutional experts have examined the 2d Amend. and construed it to guarantee rights to the individual, rather than the government militia. In my read that's exactly what it states.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." 'Government' in the Constitution (and particularly in the Declaration of Independence) is to be feared for its inevitable inclination to Tyranny, and necessarily then, harnessed and fettered by the laws of the new republic. It was assumed that eventually any government will go bad and the ability to resist your own government (gone bad) by force of arms was understood to be one of the last resorts to Tyranny. The fact that it sits uneasily with many modern sensibilities doesn't mean it doesn't say what it says. Though that's just the way I see, and there is a lot of disagreement continuing. I think the Supremes have a 2d Amend. case in this term; I haven't been following it. Marek ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ruthsimplicity" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Universal healthcare was included in *higher taxes and > > > redistribution of wealth*. Democrats have fought tooth > > > and nail to erode the first and second amendments thru > > > attacks on religious freedom, free political speech, and > > > the attempts to restrict gun ownership. > > > > > Generally, when I hear words like "socialist" and "agenda" I tune out. > But . . . > > Higher taxes: This doesn't have anything to do with your party > affiliation. If you spend a lot, generally taxes have to go up. The > republicans have been spending a lot of late, but have not touched the > taxes. If they go up under the dems, it could be because we have to pay > for the prior republican spending. > > Redistribution of wealth. This occurs all the time. We have a social > contract. We are in this country together. The constitution gives > power to the government to tax in order to provide for the general > welfare. We tax for roads and other infrastructure. We tax for > defense. We tax for education. We tax for social security. What makes > universal health care any different? We provide it through Medicare to > the elderly. Why not everyone? It isn't like people are going to lose > their will to work if they get health care paid for by tax dollars. > > Democrats attack religious freedom or political speech? Ha! Show me. > Don't forget that the federal government is not allowed to support a > particular religion or any religion. > > Gun ownership regulation is not supported by all democrats, that is > probably why we haven't got very far on gun control. However, you > reading of the second amendment is contrary to its historic > interpretation and at a minimum it is clear that it is perfectly legal > to put some restrictions on gun ownership. Though I would agree with > people who say that the second amendment is very awkwardly worded, which > has led to many needless arguments. >
