"We The People" Act

[Father Time]

Allow me to rephrase, I don't get why the sex part is a major concern. The overall tone would effect way more than just some gay people.

Yes it can effect straights as well, states can ban birth control if they get to ignore supreme court precedent.

(and yes I know there's more to it then sex but that part just lept out at me).

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

"(B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction"

So under this law, states can re-instate sodomy laws and tons of other useless unneeded laws that take away freedom.

That clause is simply saying what the courts may not do. Look to your own state constitution for what your state government has the authority to do. I doubt that it would allow for the state government to enact any sodomy laws.

 

[sealybobo]

"We The People" Act

This is an interesting piece of legislation that re-affirms the rights of the States over the Supreme Court, among other things.

Hi Kevin. My problem with this issue is that I don't want 1 state doing something that the other 49 don't want them to do.

Drill for oil in Federally protected land.
Start up slavery again
Pollute too much and have that pollution flying into other states
Selling Great Lakes water to places where it won't ultimately go back into the great lakes, thus screwing other states that border the great lakes.

Is the Federal Government bullying the states? Please give some examples. One I can think of is California. Arnold wanted stricter car emission standards than the Federal Government was requiring, and I guess the Federal Government told them they couldn't have their own standards. I could understand if California was trying to have weaker standards, but they were trying for STRICTER standards. So I don't understand why the Federal Government would mind, other than they were protecting special interest.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Hi Kevin. My problem with this issue is that I don't want 1 state doing something that the other 49 don't want them to do.

Drill for oil in Federally protected land.
Start up slavery again
Pollute too much and have that pollution flying into other states
Selling Great Lakes water to places where it won't ultimately go back into the great lakes, thus screwing other states that border the great lakes.

Is the Federal Government bullying the states? Please give some examples. One I can think of is California. Arnold wanted stricter car emission standards than the Federal Government was requiring, and I guess the Federal Government told them they couldn't have their own standards. I could understand if California was trying to have weaker standards, but they were trying for STRICTER standards. So I don't understand why the Federal Government would mind, other than they were protecting special interest.

However, all the states are independent and sovereign so it doesn't matter what one state does compared to another state. For example, some states allow the death penalty and others do not.

Slavery cannot be started up, the Constitution makes that illegal.

 

[DiamondDave]

Hi Kevin. My problem with this issue is that I don't want 1 state doing something that the other 49 don't want them to do.

Drill for oil in Federally protected land.
Start up slavery again
Pollute too much and have that pollution flying into other states
Selling Great Lakes water to places where it won't ultimately go back into the great lakes, thus screwing other states that border the great lakes.

Is the Federal Government bullying the states? Please give some examples. One I can think of is California. Arnold wanted stricter car emission standards than the Federal Government was requiring, and I guess the Federal Government told them they couldn't have their own standards. I could understand if California was trying to have weaker standards, but they were trying for STRICTER standards. So I don't understand why the Federal Government would mind, other than they were protecting special interest.

Slavery?? Are you fucking serious?? Good Grief Charlie Brown

And as for Ah-nold... likes to try and claim states rights for certain things.. then goes whining to the Fed for their assistance and their enforcement on others... Sorry Charlie, you don't get it both ways...

When there is a federal standard, it does apply to all, and equally... I actually agree with you that if Cali wanted something a bit more stringent, it should be admired... but I have serious doubts as to the validity of your whole claim.. as Cali already DOES enforce higher standards on certain things, above the federal guideline... there would seem to be more to it than you are stating

And please don't think that any level of government does not make decisions based on special interests at times