Originally posted by Roper
...Paul would see it a States Right issue.
Possibly, but since Dr. Paul has proven his strict adherence to the Constitution so well, let's see how that particular issue might actually be
handled by the Constitution. From what I see in the Constitution
, there's probably two places
that seem to come so close to such a personal level.
At first, we'd have to see who would actually have "jurisdiction" in this case:
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
Taken literally (which is the way that the Constitution is meant
to be taken), the Feds were not specifically granted
such a Power...The
States were not specifically denied
the Power. Yet, since the true
sovereignty is reserved to the People, they may be able to persuade
(through political activism) the State whichever way the People want it to go. But still, using this particular clause, the decision should be left to
However, when we look elsewhere in the Constitution:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the United States of America.
Hold on, what's that phrase? "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves & our posterity" & this whole paragraph has been declared by "We the
People!" So this means that it's the People
who are forming their States into a Union! This is what declares that the true Sovereignty of the
People is above
any level of Government.
So it seems to me (& possibly Ron Paul, if he strictly sticks to the Constitution as a "whole unit") that this should be an issue left to the
decision of the individual Citizen
. Of course, Ron Paul may not agree with the reasons to leave the issue to individual choice, but I think
such Constitutional logic would prevail with him. In either case & at the very least, that would still mean leaving "the damn Feds" out of it.
Originally posted by Maxmars
Contrary to 'apparent partisan paradigm' I think we should all be citizens of our State BEFORE we are citizens of our Nation. Did I just
Actually, no you didn't blaspheme...There are two kinds of Citizenship
! At the
website, they look at the various laws (& particularly the Constituion above any other law) & have
determined that you are automatically a State Citizen according to where you are born...In that case, you really are
a State Citizen before you
can become a federal citizen; At the linked site, there really is
a reason to use capital letters in "State Citizen" & lowercase letters in
"federal citizen" so that's why I do it here too!
You are not "automatically" a federal citizen, unless you were born in, or naturalized in a
(which includes US Territories/Possesions & other Zones within State boundaries,
such Military Bases & even the Federal Building in the downtown area of your city): You would also be a federal citizen if you're a foreign immigrant
who has become Naturalized under the Immigration Laws. There are a few other ways to become a federal citizen, but the point is...You were right the
I've already discussed this over on page 8 of another thread
...Lots of good info
there, so check out the whole thread.
Originally posted by Aaron_Justin
Listen to what is being said about the Federal Reserve and exactly what they cause.
Exactly! There's already been a lot of detailed discussion about the Fed Res & how bad it really is...Rather than spend a lot of time & space here
just to list a lot of links, I suggest using the ATS Search & use "Federal Reserve" as keywords in the thread title. Be warned that if you also use
those same keywords to search the text within the posts
, you'll get overwhelmed!