The Constitution Gives Power To The People
Dear Editor,
As the fight over the Roe v. Wade situation continues and the (National Socialist) Democrat Party continues its campaign of lies and fear mongering to keep its robot foot soldiers motivated, one thing I haven’t seen much of – the people with the knowledge and common sense reminding people that if this happens it doesn’t mean a total ban on abortions but gives the decision back to where it belongs, that being the individual States and, by that, the people and not those that see themselves as our masters.
All the ruckus and violence shows a glaring lack of education and basic understanding of the Constitution and what it says. When I was in school (yes, it was a log cabin) one of the required classes for graduation was the U.S. government, which I found fascinating. It was not this civics crap taught today but how the government was formed, how it operates and, the most important the part, the Constitution and how it guides and controls the federal government, or at least how it’s supposed to.
After the First and Second Amendments, I believe the most important Amendment is the 10th. I’ll save you the trouble of trying to look it up.
The 10th Amendment reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
How much more simple can it be? If the Constitution doesn’t say this is the responsibility of the federal government, then it’s the power and responsibility of the individual states, and thus the people, to decide what and how it will work. And it was up to the members of the House of Representatives to act for the people. The senators were to be selected by the state government as representatives for the state, which is why every state has varying numbers of representatives based on population but every state has two senators regardless of population size. When the change was made to elect senators by the popular vote of the people instead of the state government, the power of the states was eliminated and given to the federal government, thus giving that body all the power.
Think of how much smaller we could make the federal government. Think of how much more control we the people would have over our lives.
Carpe diem,
Alan Marshall
Thank you Alan Marshall for your post. I don’t read the N&R so I don’t know if anyone has written to point out how the 10th Amendment should have been applied when Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Court to those who look to that newspaper for their information. No doubt this is going to cause a lot of fighting and bickering. If there was ever a time for Americans to read and discuss and understand the Constitution it is right now.
What lies are you referring too? With the supreme court ruling, it is well understood up to 26 states will greatly limit access to safe abortions. That scares a lot of women that they will be forced to have unwanted children they potentially can not afford, care for, or protect because birth control failed. It is especially scary since modern republicans don’t support health care for all children, don’t support federal or state financial support for child care, and don’t support financial support for families that struggle financially to keep food on the table.
Modern republicans support birth but DON’T support children.
Chris, surely even you are not that stupid to ask “what lies.” Either that or have the most serious case of the denials, aka head up your 4th point of contact (a paratrooper term) as anyone has ever had.
As for the rest of your statement, you are eating up the BS your masters are feeding you like a starving man at a buffet. Yes, a number of states are going to ban or greatly restrict abortions, but I defy you to name one state that will not only ban abortions but forbid women from going to a state that will continue to allow them. Your statement is the greatest example of glaring flat out ignorance you have ever written,bar none.
But let’s take this discussion to a foolproof,always works answer that, last time I checked, has had only one exception. JUST DON’T HAVE INTERCOURSE!!! No boom boom, no baby! What a concept!
Oh, and that one exception I mentioned was Mary, Mother of Christ.
Thanks Alan! I agree with you wholeheartedly. Jefferson, Madison, and Franklin were basically trying to make this new government have limited power and actually give the states more power to do their own thing. Federal gov’t was supposed to protect the people by providing a militia, oversee commerce and trade. If it wasn’t specifically designated in the Constitution then it became a social issue, then the states were to decide for themselves how to handle social issues, not the Supreme Court. With this in mind, Roe v.Wade never should’ve been adopted in the first place. And I agree that there is a for sure way to prevent getting pregnant and that is abstinence! Consenting adults “should” be aware of possible consequences and be prepared to deal with it. Safe drop off and adoption agencies were created just for this reason. Abortion was created as an easy out for careless people who want no responsibility for their actions. If one can’t control their urges then they have a bigger problem than worrying about Roe v. Wade. Be responsible, deal with the consequences of your actions, and don’t expect someone else to always bail you out of your bad choices.
So I guess I didn’t lie and I stand by my statements as my statements.
Nothing like a boomer to promote abstinence. Just another old white man telling women what they should do with their bodies. What a joke.
Chris are you a paid troll? Just curious based on your comments and how you respond.
chris. Why only one side of the story. Why not enforce child support laws for men who make the babies. It does take two to do the deed. Why is it the federal or states job to provide the social network to support children. Don’t make babies if you’re not willing or able to provide for them. If you have sex be prepared for the consequences. People are always wanting the government to bail them out of what is their responsibility, it’s like watching college kids get two, three and four degrees in useless studies borrow all the money to do it and now want their student loans forgiven. What a crock. Just like Judge Judy says “ you ate the steak now pay the bill” So if that happens will the government be willing to go back a repay all the money to people who paid their loans. I sure hope so I’ve got three children who I helped get thru college and the last one just finished paying off her loan a couple years ago. We could use all that money back now.
What chris no response
Not often on the weekend. But I greatly appreciate your interest in my response.
Aussie,
Bravo!!! My thoughts exactly!
For one, two broke people can’t that couldn’t support a child together, are NOT going to be able to support a child separated. Regardless of what the courts demand.
Abstinence is a silly idea. Birth control pills are less than perfect for a range of issues. IUDs are expensive and good solution for those that can afford (many insurance policies don’t cover). Again, a bunch of old white men, make decisions that will most negatively impact poor young women.
Pathetic.
Just get ready for increased demand for child welfare programs and suffering of single mothers and young families that are already struggling to make a living.
How about forced sterilization like what was done in the 50-60’s or do as China does for population control. And Chris I’d make sure you are first in line for either along with that damn yankee fishbreath. Just curious. Why is abstinence such a silly idea.
Abstinence is silly because sex is fun, feels good and is part of a loving relationship. You should try it sometime. Just a reminder, not only single women seek abortions.
Abortion was not possible when the Constitution was written, nor was it even thought to be possible.
So how can there be a Constitutional right to abortion?
Excellent point Austin. While there are other things not in the Constitution but have been adopted, it was done only after following the process outlined in the Constitution, not by judicial whim.
The primary purpose for the Supreme Court is to interpret existing law, not create it.
Abortion is as old as child birth.
If you say so.. (eyes rolling)
We’re not talking about just ripping out the kid and killing it (and the mother).
Austin,
You have an excellent point but there have been other things not concived of at the time of the writing, but is why in their wisdom the Founders included a process for making any necessary changes to our founding documents.
Yes, so? I agree.
Ben Franklin actually published a recipe for chemical abortion. This was in 1748. So much for more white washed history from Austin.
Too bad your mother didn’t use it.
Did you just happen to overlook or intentionally leave out this part of the potential effects of one of the items in that recipe?
“…but is toxic to the liver and has caused some deaths.”
Right. So good thing we turned abortion over to doctors….oh wait, republicans don’t care about people. Just power.
But it answers the question of abortion has always been apart of American history. So….hmmmmm guess you and Austin are again wrong. Shocker.
And how many abortions were there in 1748?
It wasn’t an issue because there were no abortions performed at that time. Therefore, no “Constitutional right to abortion”. But hey, if you can show me where there’s any Constitutional right to abort a baby in the US Constitution, bring it on.
I’m waiting eagerly.
So your rationale is we go back to living like it was in 1748? What a joke.
Constitution protects individual freedoms and right to privacy. Both protections cover any medical procedure.
What..??
What utter nonsense.
And you have failed to point out a constitutional right to abortion – because there is none.