CDZ Why Not Let States Decide?

[jwoodie]

We have many contentious issues (e.g., abortion and gay marriage) for which there is no consensus. Why must they all be decided at the Federal level? Why not let States decide for themselves? Please leave out the moral arguments on both sides; there are just as many people who come to opposite conclusions. Also, the 13th and 14th Amendments specifically dealt with the end of slavery and the civil war, so don't bother with applying them to current issues.

I just want to know why you think the States shouldn't be allowed to decide these issues on their own.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

Instead of asking why states should not be Peeping Toms, how about you ask why they should?

 

[Nosmo King]

We have many contentious issues (e.g., abortion and gay marriage) for which there is no consensus. Why must they all be decided at the Federal level? Why not let States decide for themselves? Please leave out the moral arguments on both sides; there are just as many people who come to opposite conclusions. Also, the 13th and 14th Amendments specifically dealt with the end of slavery and the civil war, so don't bother with applying them to current issues.

I just want to know why you think the States shouldn't be allowed to decide these issues on their own.

If a same sex couple marries in Connecticut but then moves to Ohio, their marriage will not be recognized. This is the circumstance argued before the Supreme Court today.

 

[Caroljo]

I'm pretty sure states ARE deciding. Michigan turned it down again. I also think states should be able to vote on abortion. I think overall most states would be against it.

 

[Josf]

When the people agree to abide by the suggestions offered through rule of law secured with a working federation the people in the states decide.

That is explained here:
Reclaiming the American Revolution The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy William Watkins 9781403963031 Amazon.com Books

Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.

Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government, the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you want to know why the working federation was replaced by the counterfeit version working for the criminals now, then a good start is here:
Avalon Project - Notes of the Secret Debates of the Federal Convention of 1787 Taken by the Late Hon Robert Yates Chief Justice of the State of New York and One of the Delegates from That State to the Said Convention

Secret proceedings and debates of the convention assembled at Philadelphia in the year 1787
___________________________________________________
Page 13 Luther Martin

One party, whose object and wish it was to abolish and annihilate all State governments, and to bring forward one general government, over this extensive continent, of monarchical nature, under certain restrictions and limitations. Those who openly avowed this sentiment were, it is true, but few; yet it is equally true, Sir, that there were a considerable number, who did not openly avow it, who were by myself, and many others of the convention, considered as being in reality favorers of that sentiment; and, acting upon those principles, covertly endeavoring to carry into effect what they well knew openly and avowedly could not be accomplished.
____________________________________________________

 

[DarkFury]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

Instead of asking why states should not be Peeping Toms, how about you ask why they should?

The homos and the PRO borts would lose any national vote that is why they fight it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Because SCOTUS says so. The thread can be closed now.

 

[DarkFury]

Because SCOTUS says so. The thread can be closed now.

Does SCOTUS run the country or the people?

 

[daws101]

Because SCOTUS says so. The thread can be closed now.

Does SCOTUS run the country or the people?

what people would those be....?

 

[DarkFury]

Because SCOTUS says so. The thread can be closed now.

Does SCOTUS run the country or the people?

what people would those be....?

Voters, let the voters decide.

 

[midcan5]

The thread poster answered her/his own query. How? Thinking cap on - 13th and 14th is the hint.

 

[HR Pufnstuf]

Let there be NO mistake. I am not advocating the abolition of states rights and powers, but only explaining why state's right has diminished over time.
We have long ago left the idea that states autonomy in order to embrace a more structured society through a stronger national government. Most of this is because America moved from an agrarian culture where more localized control was necessary to a urban/mechanized society that requires a broader scope of control. With the advent of the automobile and a national highway system, Americans are far more mobile, meaning laws must be equally applied to where ever one travels. This mobility effectively broke down state borders because they were much easily crossed. Further erosion of state individuality happened with the popular use of mass media such as radio and television. No longer we states that were across the country an obscure idea where little was known of them. With radio and especially television those living in New York see, know and understand what is happening in California as clearly as their own state. That is because distance no longer makes a difference about what news and information is readily available to each American. So it was not the federal government that intruded on state's rights and authority but rather a reflection of how mobility, technology, urbanization and homogenization has changed our nation.

 

[Moonglow]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

Instead of asking why states should not be Peeping Toms, how about you ask why they should?

The homos and the PRO borts would lose any national vote that is why they fight it.

What about us sperm spillovers?

 

[jwoodie]

The thread poster answered her/his own query. How? Thinking cap on - 13th and 14th is the hint.

(yawn) That race card is getting frayed...

 

[daws101]

The thread poster answered her/his own query. How? Thinking cap on - 13th and 14th is the hint.

(yawn) That race card is getting frayed...

so is the faux conservative joker card.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Has anyone explained why we want government meddling in and controlling the private lives of consenting adults?

 

[daws101]

Has anyone explained why we want government meddling in and controlling the private lives of consenting adults?

only gays and people who have sex in other than the missionary position.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Because SCOTUS says so. The thread can be closed now.

Does SCOTUS run the country or the people?

Amazing that a man with the 4th highest IQ of all time doesn't understand the purpose of the SCOTUS.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Has anyone explained why we want government meddling in and controlling the private lives of consenting adults?

only gays and people who have sex in other than the missionary position.

True dat.

What would they say about govt meddling in their religion? Or in their marriage choices? Birth control choices?

It truly astounds me the way the right fights against individual liberty and FOR Big Government.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Because SCOTUS says so. The thread can be closed now.

Does SCOTUS run the country or the people?

Amazing that a man with the 4th highest IQ of all time doesn't understand the purpose of the SCOTUS.

Actually, it's pretty amazing that apparently most right wingers don't understand the purpose of the SCOTUS!