Kippling,
That is my point, the founders’ other writings reflect their “personal” feelings, the fact that they did not include those same items in the Constitution shows indicates they did try to keep those feelings from coloring the law of the land.
Vincent Pinson,
I was unaware of the issue with Utah and Arizona and would have been opposed to special conditions being applied to those states. I’m sure you are aware that Texas specifically reserved the right to leave the union and was made war upon by the Federal government when they exercised it. You have just provided yet another example of the Federal over reach I am talking about, no doubt implemented by social conservatives.
I still do not agree that granting a right or privilege to another citizen somehow detracts from yours. The pettiness of your argument consistently drives moderate voters away from the conservative cause.
Most death penalties are meted out by states as they should be. A Constitutional amendment should have been put in place prior to implementing Federal death sentences in my opinion. Also take a look at the war powers as defined by the Constitution and ask how the Federal government got so out of control as to put is in war after war without declaring any of them.
The Socons seem willing to let the Federal government have all sorts of control over the personal relations of others and don’t seem to realize that this attitude facilitates the Federal government taking all sorts of control over other things. The law should not be a weapon wielded by special interest groups. The Federal government should not be used as an enforcer of your moral code because you feel self righteous than it should be a re-distributor of wealth because the socialists have class guilt.
Lincoln isn’t one of my favorites but he could turn a good phrase, “Those who deny liberty to others deserve it not themselves.”
