• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Can't Require a License to Exercise a Right

JmE

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Messages
358
Location
, ,
But they are authorized to not vote the way you want them too, right? That's the risk we take in having the convenience of a representative government.
I had to think that first part through (with the negatives)! lol

Yes.

And it's not up to the legislative branches to determine is something is constitutional or not.

Meh. That gives them too easy of a pass. There's some common sense that's been disregarded by our politicians when it comes to constitutional issues. Again though, they lack legitimate authority to write and pass unconstitutional laws. They might be in the seat at the time but they still aren't authorized to blatantly violate the constitution.
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Speak for yourself.
+1

I had to think that first part through (with the negatives)! lol

Yes.



Meh. That gives them too easy of a pass. There's some common sense that's been disregarded by our politicians when it comes to constitutional issues. Again though, they lack legitimate authority to write and pass unconstitutional laws. They might be in the seat at the time but they still aren't authorized to blatantly violate the constitution.

In addition to that there is historical evidence, Jefferson overturning the stupid aliens and sedition act, Madison vetoing an infrastructure bill as unconstitutional.


For some of the other discussion on the board the constitution isn't the be all end all of change either. It is a document created by government for government. Jefferson's declaration of independence shows it is legal and moral to cast off your government. There is also the principles of 98, we still have the rights as states and as people to nullify laws.

As Lysander Spooner brought out if it is just/right/moral for 3 million to rebel from a distant ruler it is just as just/right/moral for an individual.
 
Last edited:

carolina guy

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
1,737
Location
Concord, NC
+1



In addition to that there is historical evidence, Jefferson overturning the stupid aliens and sedition act, Madison vetoing an infrastructure bill as unconstitutional.


For some of the other discussion on the board the constitution isn't the be all end all of change either. It is a document created by government for government. Jefferson's declaration of independence shows it is legal and moral to cast off your government. There is also the principles of 98, we still have the rights as states and as people to nullify laws.

As Lysander Spooner brought out if it is just/right/moral for 3 million to rebel from a distant ruler it is just as just/right/moral for an individual.

+1
 
Top