Government Regulations Discussion (Philosophical and/or Constitutional)

Discussion in 'Politics' started by manifold, Jan 7, 2010.

  1. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,711
    Thanks Received:
    7,230
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,766
    Even putting aside the stark demonstrations of consititutional ignorance, the discussion about television commercial volume has been pretty interesting and leads me to consider some fundamental questions about government regulation in general.

    What things are you ok with the government (i.e. the people) regulating?

    What things are you not ok with the government regulating?

    Is there a litmus test concerning acceptable vs not acceptable regulation in your opinion?

    Do your philosophical/ideological views on the matter differ from your understanding of what is acceptable constitutionally?
     
  2. Big Black Dog
    Offline

    Big Black Dog Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    22,916
    Thanks Received:
    5,110
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,720
    I would love to answer these questions but unfortunately, it is against government regulations to speak of this...
     
  3. slackjawed
    Offline

    slackjawed Self deported

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,307
    Thanks Received:
    645
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    15th congressional district of Arizona
    Ratings:
    +645
    We should allow our federal government to oversee the supply of currency, defend our borders , and deliver the mail.
    Until they can do those things right, letting the federal government do anything else shouldn't even be considered.
    State governments should be restored the responsibility of providing all other services within their borders.
    The most powerful law enforcement agency in the United States should be your local police department or county Sherriff.
     
  4. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,369
    Thanks Received:
    19,843
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,401
    Sort of like the definition of pornography, you know it when you see it
     
  5. amrchaos
    Offline

    amrchaos Pentheus torn apart

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    9,501
    Thanks Received:
    926
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +2,573


    Let me answer this question

    Do your philosophical/ideological views on the matter differ from your understanding of what is acceptable constitutionally?

    Yes. Some of my Philosophical/ideological views on government does differ from what is constitutionally acceptable.

    Does not yours??
     
  6. slackjawed
    Offline

    slackjawed Self deported

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,307
    Thanks Received:
    645
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    15th congressional district of Arizona
    Ratings:
    +645
    Mine does. My belief is that the constitution was not written strongly enough to limit the power of the federal government.
     
  7. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,711
    Thanks Received:
    7,230
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,766
    It does differ, sometimes greatly, when I compare my philosphical views to what is acceptable constitutionally... in reality. That is, how the Constitution has been interpretted and applied. But not nearly as much academically. That is, when I compare my philosphical views to how I personally would interpret the Constitution.
     
  8. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    That which is can be shown must be regulated to insure a functioning society.


    Pretty much everything else...and I am a liberal, too.


    Not really. Life is too complex to have a simple litmus test for this sort of issue.

    The constiution was written so vaguely, and gives the government such leeway, that we need a Supreme court to determine what is consitutional and what is not.

    And probably like you I often disagree with them, but that's the system we have.

    Those of you who image that there is some "strict" interpretation of the constitution are simply wrong.

    The document itself is written in rubber.

    For example the Second Amendment is so badly written, and now so irrlevant to our society (state militias? we don't have any!) that it's worthless.

    And I actually DO believe that people ought to have the right to own, guns, but as far as I read that amdendment, they stopped having that right when the FEDs natioanlized the STATE national gueard units.

    Like I say the constitution no longer really serves the purpose and ought to be rewritten if we want to have a STRICT interpetation of it it needs to be written in such a way that that is possible.
     
  9. manifold
    Offline

    manifold Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    48,711
    Thanks Received:
    7,230
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    your dreams
    Ratings:
    +20,766
    Can you give a few examples?

    And how about examples of things currently regulated that don't meet your "must" criteria?
     
  10. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,343
    Thanks Received:
    12,696
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,787
    The civil rights of individuals.
     

Share This Page