Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Ron Paul!
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="soonerwings" data-source="post: 1618256" data-attributes="member: 8035"><p>Do you think that "general welfare" was inserted to give legally elected officials leeway just in case the founding fathers may have missed something? I do. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Make no mistake, the Constitution was intended to strengthen the federal government relative to the states. George Washington himself was reluctant to attend the constitutional convention for fear that the states with their "darling sovereignties" could not be overcome. Also, George Washington believed that the problem with the Articles of Confederation was quite simply "no money". Our founding fathers understood that the power to tax would increase the federal government's power relative to the states and they designed the Constitution accordingly.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Mostly agreed. I agree that state's rights are often overlooked (I'm a big fan of the 10th amendment) but I disagree with your stance that the states didn't deliberately offer up some of their power in return for a strengthened union.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Agreed.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Government by its very nature does not hate liberty. Rather, it attempts to balance individual liberties against the good of society. Is Government justified in outlawing murder? How about outlawing fraud? Is it justified in building roads that promote the economic well being of everyone at the expense of the individual in that he/she is taxed? All of these things constrain individual liberty, but unrestrained individual liberty can only result in anarchy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="soonerwings, post: 1618256, member: 8035"] Do you think that "general welfare" was inserted to give legally elected officials leeway just in case the founding fathers may have missed something? I do. Make no mistake, the Constitution was intended to strengthen the federal government relative to the states. George Washington himself was reluctant to attend the constitutional convention for fear that the states with their "darling sovereignties" could not be overcome. Also, George Washington believed that the problem with the Articles of Confederation was quite simply "no money". Our founding fathers understood that the power to tax would increase the federal government's power relative to the states and they designed the Constitution accordingly. Mostly agreed. I agree that state's rights are often overlooked (I'm a big fan of the 10th amendment) but I disagree with your stance that the states didn't deliberately offer up some of their power in return for a strengthened union. Agreed. Government by its very nature does not hate liberty. Rather, it attempts to balance individual liberties against the good of society. Is Government justified in outlawing murder? How about outlawing fraud? Is it justified in building roads that promote the economic well being of everyone at the expense of the individual in that he/she is taxed? All of these things constrain individual liberty, but unrestrained individual liberty can only result in anarchy. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Ron Paul!
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom