Tagged: 10th amendment Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • just a conservative girl 3:24 PM on 06/26/2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: 10th amendment, alito, doma, ,   

    DOMA Section Unconstitutional 

    I have made no secret of the fact that I am against gay marriage, so it may come as a surprise to some that I am happy with this ruling.  I have also made no secret of the fact that I am a huge supporter of the tenth amendment and the rights of states.

    Marriage is not the issue of the federal government.  It never has been and will remain that way unless a constitutional amendment on the issue is passed.  While I would like to see that amendment, the chances of it passing at this point in time is basically nill.  Due to that, I have to support this ruling.  Marriage is a state issue and I have never been able to wrap my brain around how a legal marriage could not be recognized by the federal government.

    Even Justice Alito acknowledges in his dissent that the constitution doesn’t speak on the issue:

    no provision of the Constitution speaks to the issue.

    If no provision speaks to the issue and Americans fully expect our government to treat people equally under the law, what is the justification for the federal government to decide which legally married couple they give benefits to and which couples they don’t?

    As a limited government. constitutional conservative,  I couldn’t find a justifiable reason for that particular section of DOMA being upheld.  This doesn’t change my views of gay marriage.  I am against it.  But marriage is state issue, not a federal one.   This is an issue that must be fought on the state level.  If states are going to legalize gay marriage, the federal government has no right to overrule that.  Limited government means just that, limiting the power of the federal government.

    The main section of DOMA has not been overturned, a state like Connecticut that has legalized gay marriage has no right to force a state like Virginia to recognize that marriage.  As it should be.

     
    • signpainterguy 4:41 PM on 06/26/2013 Permalink | Reply

      Agreed, it is a States` Rights issue, not a fed one. If a state allows gay marriage, the fed should not get in the way of it at all, nor should the fed make any special allowances to accommodate it, but other states should not be required to honor the marriage. Choice, by majority vote.

      Has any state that allows gay marriage passed the law by majority vote of the people, or has it always been a court action that made it legal ? I am under the impression that it has failed every time when put to a vote by the people !

      • just a conservative girl 5:11 PM on 06/26/2013 Permalink | Reply

        Maryland was the first to vote for it on a state wide election.
        I am actually against ballot iniatives in general and most especially on this issue. I actually think it is a legislative issue. We are not democracy and ballot iniatives are turning us into one.

        • signpainterguy 5:19 PM on 06/26/2013 Permalink | Reply

          Yes, you`re right; we are a representative, constitutional republic, not a democracy. If the legislative process is carried out properly, our reps will have determined our wishes and will move accordingly, for us.

  • just a conservative girl 6:57 AM on 12/04/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: 10th amendment, , , states rights   

    Huckabee’s Candidate Forum on States Rights 

    I just watched the re-run of the forum and I enjoyed it.  States rights is a big issue for me, so the answers that they gave were of great interest to me.  


    Rick Santorum stuck up of for the Patriot Act.  He says that it doesn’t affect our civil rights.  Huh?  Ok, I don’t make many oversees calls and when I do the people I speak to are not well-known terrorists.  But to say that the federal government should have this type of power is scary to me.  


    Rick Perry is a 10th amendment purist.  I really appreciate that and that makes me want to vote for him.  That is until he opens his mouth about executive orders.  Very troubling.  He seems to think he can solve problems in this fashion.  Does he really believe that he should be outlawing legally passed laws by executive orders?  If so, I find that very troubling.  How is that different from what Obama is doing with the EPA?  This is no different from Romney saying he would give waivers to Obamacare.  Obamacare will not go away unless it is repealed.  That is the only answer.  Is he willing to sign a repeal?  If not, I don’t know why any conservative would vote for him.  


    Michele Bachmann dodged questions and is championing a national solution to tort reform.  I want tort reform. But she is willing to bypass the states in order to do it.  Uh, no.  Tort reform is a state issue and the federal government has no role in it at all.  It is hypocrisy for her talk about the constitution then make a statement like that.  Her answer on the EPA was confusing.  She seems to be championing legislation for individual instances of issues between the states.  Huh?  How would that work?  She isn’t going to win any fans with her performance last night.  


    Mitt Romney did his usual by standing by Romneycare.  He didn’t mention the facts that insurance premiums have risen for them.  He didn’t mention that hospitals in the state are going broke because of the mandates.  He didn’t mention that half of the uninsured are still uninsured.  He also talked about NCLB.  Huh?  No Child Left Behind is yet another federal boondoggle.  Just because it was done by a republican president doesn’t make it right.  


    Newt Gingrich handled it well.  I think he got some of the toughest questions.  Which, as one of the front-runners, that was fair.  I really liked his point of the how the president can lead without passing legislation that forces states to do things.  Wouldn’t that be refreshing?  


    Ron Paul seems to believe that terrorism needs to be handled as criminal matter.  I suppose there is an argument for that, but I am not fully on board with it.  I did really like his answer on getting rid of unconstitutional mandates, such as medicare and social security.  He is 100% correct, it cannot be done in one fell swoop.  It has to be done in steps to make it easier for the people who have become far too dependent on them.  We can’t just get rid of things quickly.  This is going to be a process that is going to take time.  


    I enjoyed the format.  I think we learned a few things about the world views of the candidates when it comes to the constitution and the rights of the states.  If you are looking purely on the issues of states rights, Rick Perry came out on top with the big exception of the executive orders.  


     
    • Teresa Rice 9:36 AM on 12/04/2011 Permalink | Reply

      The Patriot Act is the primary political position in which I disagree with Santorum. As far as the rest of his positions on issues, I agree with him wholeheartedly. Family is connected to economics, or interconnected with one another. There both connected to the breakdown of our society so to leave one out of the equation would be detrimental to our country.

    • SignPainterGuy 1:16 PM on 12/04/2011 Permalink | Reply

      I missed it; can you provide a link to the vid Please ? Thanks jacg.

  • just a conservative girl 2:18 PM on 11/20/2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: 10th amendment, , menendez   

    States Rights & Child Abuse 

    I have spoken out about Coach Joe Pa’s and Mike McQueary’s lack of morality by not contacting the police themselves about Coach Sandusky’s depravity towards children. I feel that it should be felony to not report someone you witness abusing a child. Apparently in most states it is a misdemeanor, including in Pennsylvania. That is something that is tragic. People should be writing letters to the state legislators and pushing them to make the laws against this stronger. So in walks Senator Robert Menendez of New Jersey. He is introducing legislation in the U.S. Senate to require all states to beef up their laws and make the failure to report a felony. One may say that is a good thing. But it isn’t.

    This is yet one more example of the federal government usurping the rights of states. Child abuse is not a federal issue. This is an issue that is better dealt with on the local and state levels. No where in the constitution does the federal government have the right to dictate to states what type of punishments they should be doling out for criminal acts. The law will be forced on the states. How do they get around the lack of jurisdiction? They do it with money. The legislation will hold back social services money that is granted to the states by the federal government. Another words Medicaid and schip payments. All the little things that the federal government pass laws and force the states to give it’s citizens without any regards to the budgets of the states. In order to help states pay for these little goodies that they force upon them, they give them federal tax dollars to help offset the costs.

    The federal government forced the drinking age to be raised in this same fashion. They had no constitutional ability to mandate a federal drinking age, but they forced the states to raise the age by holding back money if they didn’t comply. In the mid 80’s every state across the country raised their legal drinking age to 21. It didn’t matter that states may have felt that 18, 19, or 20 was something that was good for their citizens.

    It does not matter that the law may be a good thing. It is the way that the federal government is bribing states with large amounts of money to force their will upon them. Write a letter to your Senators and explain to them being against this bill doesn’t make you pro child abuse. It makes you pro tenth amendment.

    Stand up to the likes of Senator Menedez and his belief that the federal government has the right to bribe states into following their will. This isn’t about child abuse or drunk driving. This is about rights of the states. The federal government has no place in state laws.  If you feel that your state should make the failure to report a felony, contact your governor and state senator.

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel