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: 1618923" data-attributes="member: 8035"><p>We both agree that the intent of the Constitution is to limit the power of the central government. However, we tend to disagree on just where the limits are. You advocate that the lines "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;" refer only to the enumerated powers that follow them while I advocate that those lines contain enumerated powers as well. You keep coming back to whole sovereignty issue but the fact still remains that the founding fathers knew that the articles gave too much power to the states and not enough to the central government. The entire reason the Constitution was created was to strengthen the position of the "common" government in relation to the states. This being the case, it cannot be argued that the founding fathers intended for separate states with unlimited sovereignty.</p><p></p><p>I do agree that the federal government is WAY out of it's intended bounds, you and I just tend to disagree a little on the precise location of the boundaries.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="soonerwings, post: 1618923, member: 8035"] We both agree that the intent of the Constitution is to limit the power of the central government. However, we tend to disagree on just where the limits are. You advocate that the lines "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;" refer only to the enumerated powers that follow them while I advocate that those lines contain enumerated powers as well. You keep coming back to whole sovereignty issue but the fact still remains that the founding fathers knew that the articles gave too much power to the states and not enough to the central government. The entire reason the Constitution was created was to strengthen the position of the "common" government in relation to the states. This being the case, it cannot be argued that the founding fathers intended for separate states with unlimited sovereignty. I do agree that the federal government is WAY out of it's intended bounds, you and I just tend to disagree a little on the precise location of the boundaries. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Ron Paul!
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom