The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-04-2004, 09:43 AM   #91
Radar
Constitutional Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 4,006
No problem. There are a bunch of idiots out there who are stupid enough to believe that ONLY the Supreme Court makes this decision, but the Supreme Court themselves said in Marbury vs. Madison that we the citizens (aka the bosses of the government) make that decision for ourselves. To claim otherwise is ludicrous.

If Congress suddenly decided to pass the no more abortion bill which said girls under the age of 18 must all be forcefully sterilized it would not have to even be looked at by the Supreme Court to be unconstitutional in its face. It would be unconstitutional the moment it was signed. Even if the Supreme Court never made a decision or heard a case involving the forced sterilization law, it would still be unconstitutional and nobody would have to follow it. Only an idiot with no comprehension what-so-ever of government would suggest it was constitutional until the USSC decided on it. Only the worst scumbag would suggest we actually start following through with the sterilizing while we wait for the Supreme Court to hear a case on it.

The Supreme Court is made up of people, not of magicians. Laws don't magically become constitutional or unconstitutional because they say so. Laws are constitutional or unconstitutional the moment they're created whether or not the Supreme Court ever gets around to hearing cases on them. The Supreme Court's job is limited to comparing new laws, court cases, etc. to the Constitution to see if they fit properly and settling disputes between states and NOTHING else. The Supreme Court's job doesn't include "interpreting" or "defining" the Constituion, which doesn't need interpretation since it's written in English.

Let's say I'm sent to go grocery shopping for my wife. She lists 1 lb of Ground Round, Butter, Turkey Bacon, and Wheat Bread and I'm told never to deviate from the list much like government is told never to deviate from the Constitution. My job (much like the Supreme Court's job) isn't to "interpret" the list, but merely to follow it. When I go to the store, I don't decide what goes on the list, I don't change the language of the list, and I don't do anything other than compare an item to the list to see if it matches. If I hold see Chocolate Cake on the shelf but don't see it on the list, I know not to get it. In fact even if I see White Bread, Pork Bacon, Ground Chuck, or Margarine in the store, they don't qualify.

I am not given discretion to deviate from the list and neither is the Supreme Court.

So once again, I'll repeat this so you can get it through your head.

EACH AND EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN DECIDES FOR THEMSELVES WHETHER A LAW IS CONSTITUTIONAL OR NOT AND THAT LAW MUST NOT NECESSARILY BE DECIDED ON BY THE SUPREME COURT TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, PERIOD.

Like the Supreme Court, citizens do not have discretion to define or interpret the Constitution. They can not "decide" that murder is constitutional and follow through on it, or to steal from others because they've "interpreted" the Constitution to allow it. The entire federal government is here for one and only one purpose, to defend our person, rights, and property from tresspass, theft, and non-consensual harm whether that be from each other, or from outside forces. Citizens, unlike the Supreme Court, hold the power to actually change the Constitution since it is the citizens who hold 100% of the power and are the masters of government (our servant).

The Federal government's legitimate role does not include charity, education, healthcare, retirement, imperialism, spying on Americans, limiting the rights of citizens, etc.
__________________
"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
- George Carlin
Radar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 09:48 AM   #92
OnyxCougar
Junior Master Dwellar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Kingdom of Atlantia
Posts: 2,979
Hey Radar, on one of the sites you listed for the 16th Amendment, it says that
Quote:
that the Constitution requires a Declaration of War before the armed forces of the United States can be deployed in hostilities overseas.
But you said that under no circumstances is the US military to go overseas, under the constitution. Can you clarify this for me?
OnyxCougar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 09:53 AM   #93
Radar
Constitutional Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 4,006
Quote:
So explain please, how this amendment is not legal again? You mentioned that it wasn't legally ratified. For those people that are completely ignorant, please provide sources.
36 votes were required to pass the amendment, but most of the states you've listed violated their own state Constitutions by voting on the amendment with the same senate that recieved the proposed amendment. Most states have a provision that says if an amendment to the Constitution is proposed, the senate who recieves it can not vote on it because they must allow the people one election cycle to choose who will vote on the amendment. So those states are gone. Next many of the states actually re-wrote the proposed amendments (sometimes to mean the exact opposite of what it proposed) before signing it and sending it in. This is also not allowed. So those states are out. Some states actually voted against the amendment and their votes were tallied as voting for it by Philander Knox (the man who illegally and fraudently ratified the amendment).

In the end there were not even close to the required number of legal votes to legitimately ratify the amendment.

Feel free to do some reading. Bill Benson actually travelled to all of the states who supposedly voted to ratify the amendment, searched their archives and actually got certified copies of all the documents in question and proved without a doubt that the 16th amendment was not legally ratified.

Feel free to read his extremelly large and comprehensive books "The Law That Never Was - Vol I" and "The Law That Never Was - Vol II". You can find it at:

http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com

Of he states you listed as ratifying the amendment here's just a few examples that prove my point...
  • The Kentucky Senate voted upon the resolution, but rejected it by a vote of 9 in favor and 22 opposed.
  • The Oklahoma Senate amended the language of the 16th Amendment to have a precisely opposite meaning.
  • The California legislative assembly never recorded any vote upon any proposal to adopt the amendment proposed by Congress.
  • The State of Minnesota sent nothing to the Secretary of State in Washington

Even if there were only one of these, it would mean the amendment hadn't been legally ratified.
__________________
"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
- George Carlin

Last edited by Radar; 01-04-2004 at 10:15 AM.
Radar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 09:56 AM   #94
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Sure, everyone must decide whether to follow the law or not, but the law does apply to them in any case. The court system is where they work out whether you're locked up for your decision. Whether or not you are right will have no bearing on their figuring.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 09:57 AM   #95
Radar
Constitutional Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 4,006
Quote:
But you said that under no circumstances is the US military to go overseas, under the constitution. Can you clarify this for me?
I didn't say the US military could never go overseas, I said they couldn't be stationed overseas during times of peace and the only valid reason for the US military to be used ever is to defend against an impending attack or to retaliate for one that has occurred even if we must go overseas to retaliate. This is the very definition of a "Defensive" military and DEFENSE (not OFFENSE) is the SOLE PURPOSE of the US Military as defined by the US Constitution in the phrase "common DEFENSE"

Quote:
Sure, everyone must decide whether to follow the law or not, but the law does apply to them in any case.
Wrong. The law does not apply if it is unconstitutional in its face and we need not wait for a Supreme Court decision on the matter as the first Supreme Court of the United States declared in Marbury vs. Madison.
__________________
"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
- George Carlin

Last edited by Radar; 01-04-2004 at 10:00 AM.
Radar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 10:27 AM   #96
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
No, it applies in the real world, where you can be convicted and put behind bars for doing something even though it is Constitutionally defensible.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 10:40 AM   #97
Radar
Constitutional Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 4,006
In the real world the Supreme Court and the Constitution (the highest law in the land) are exactly as I've said. If you are about to be arrested or locked up for a blatantly unconstitutional law, you are within your rights to kill anyone who tries to do the arresting or locking up in your own defense.

Let's go back to the forced sterilization example. If the Supreme Court refused to hear the case and I said I would not allow the government to sterilize my daughter. If police came to my house to arrest me, or to sterilize my daughter, I would be within my legal rights to kill every single person who tried to do it.

That's not a fantasy, that's reality. The reality of a bullet going through someone's skull. You fail to understand that the powers of government are extremely limited and that the people are the masters while government is the servant.

You need to grow up and get an education, assuming you're capable of learning.
__________________
"I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death."
- George Carlin
Radar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 10:53 AM   #98
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Staying in the real world here, if you don't appear on a summons and kill the people who come to retrieve you, you can expect that the state will bring all of its resources to bear, and you will eventually either be killed or jailed for life.

The absurd sterilization case is interesting because, if it were to somehow pass tomorrow, without the consent of most of society, it would be ignored by almost everyone with a role to play in the system. The cops can choose not to arrest people breaking the law. The prosecutors can choose not to prosecute the arrestees. The judges can choose not to apply the law, or to apply a light sentence. The jury can decide not to convict. The whole thing can go through appeals or be thrown out on technicalities.

The application of the law requires a lot of people to buy into it one way or the other and almost any of them can dismiss any case very easily. I can predict that none of them, however, would buy into the notion that the Constitution operates the way you think it does and not the way they think it does. No matter how sure of your convictions you are, how eloquent your defense, etc. the law will apply to you the way they think it does, not the way you think it does.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 10:56 AM   #99
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
And I follow that up with: in some cases, that does in fact suck. It sucks hard.

But given the inevitability of politics in a system implemented by imperfect people, it's not really that bad of a system. It's close.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:58 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.