Tenthers; New breed of idiot?

Rune

Mjölner
New (to me) breed of idiots at large.
Read the article and see whether you can find any contradictions.

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/05/06/what-is-a-tenther/


There seems to be a bit of confusion of what it means to be a Constitutionalist or supporter of the Tenth Amendment (Both go hand in hand) and a Conservative. Let me explain my definition of both.
A Constitutionalist and Tenth Amendment supporter believe that the U.S. Constitution is arguably the greatest political document man could devise. Sure, the Articles of Confederation were also a great document, in fact the Convention delegates that gave us the current Constitution were technically meeting only to revise the Articles. With that said, we support the United States Constitution wholeheartedly and want those elected to Federal office to abide by it. Unfortunately, they stopped many, many years ago.
What does supporting the Constitution mean? Many people who call themselves “Conservative” have rebuked us for betraying conservative principles ie… Gun Rights, Abortion, Homosexual Marriage, Drugs and prayer in school to name a few.
If you are a federal office holder and “Conservative”, you should always defend the Second Amendment, look to overturn Roe v. Wade, vote for the Marriage Amendment and absolutely be in favor of the War on Drugs. This is what a Conservative is conserving, right?
What if I told you that the Federal government has no business what-so-ever getting involved in these issues? That the Bill of Rights is intended as a limitation on the power of the FEDERAL government ONLY, not the states, and that any federally elected person, conservative or not, that votes in favor of laws that interfere with these things is breaking their oath to support and defend the U.S. Constitution.
What would you say?
The Founding Fathers debated this issue quite thoroughly. There were many in attendance who wished to have us become a consolidated, national government. James Madison repeatedly tried to grant the federal government the power to negate all state laws. He was soundly defeated each time.
In the end we were given a Federal Republic that was made up of individual sovereign states. These states delegated limited and enumerated powers to the federal government. To be certain that there was no mistake, they had the Tenth Amendment added: “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.”
Couldn’t be much clearer – if it’s not in the Constitution, it’s left for the states or the people to decide.
Yet today, so called conservatives want the federal government involved in myriads of everyday-life activities. Take the Second Amendment for example. I am an avid gun collector and shooter. You will be hard pressed to find anyone more “Pro-Gun” than me. I believe that the Federal government has no right to tell me if I can own a firearm or not. They have no right to dictate to my state or it’s citizens (unfortunately, they don’t need too) on whether or not I can own a machine gun, suppressor, high capacity magazine, bayonet or any other accessories. They have no right to tell me I can’t purchase a firearm from one state and have it shipped to mine without a federal license.
However, the Supreme Court and the Federal government also have no right to tell my state that they MUST or must not allow concealed handguns or any other weapon. You see, the federal government must stay out of things that don’t concern them. The Second Amendment remember, is part of the Bill of Rights, which in turn limits the FEDERAL government ONLY.
Just imagine if all these rules and regulations were left where they belong, in the states. Granted, you may not like your states rules and regulations, here in the Peoples Republic of New York, they are horrendous. We are one of the greatest welfare states in the union. However, I would much rather fight local politicians to have these laws overturned than have to fight against a politician from California or Massachusetts.
If you allow these laws in your state and don’t fight to repeal them, shame on you. You could always move to a pro-freedom state.
The same with Marriage. If the people of your state want to allow Homosexual marriages, which I am against on moral grounds, so be it. Either fight to repeal it or move. How dare the Federal government and Nancy Pelosi tell me and my neighbors that I have to have Homosexual marriage or not.
Abortion? Same thing, I am against it, however, if you are not willing to effect change in your own state, how dare you tell others how to run their lives. Prayer in school? If my neighborhood school wants to say a prayer each morning to thank God, who is some atheist in New Jersey to say we cannot?
How dare anyone expect the federal government to act like a bully and force change in your neighborhood whether you want it or not. The Supreme Court? They once decided that African Americans were property! Yeah, I’ll trust their decisions.
The lesson here is simple. The federal government was delegated certain enumerated powers from the people of the several states. Everything else is left to those states to decide for themselves. Whether they want school prayer, the death penalty, abortions, medical marijuana or machine guns.
True “conservatives” should be fighting to conserve these principles. We are all on the same side. We agree on most issues and fighting amongst ourselves only allows the Frankenstein Monster we call the federal government to run ram shod over our individual freedoms.
 
  1. Liberals want to take guns away from law abiding folks; conservatives want these citizens who want them to be able to own them unhindered.
  2. Liberals want the government to pay for abortions and infringe on the parent's right to know what their child is doing. Conservatives want the lives of unborn to be protected.
  3. Liberals want the government to sanction unnatural unions and call them "marriage". Conservatives want to protect the fundamental core values of society.
  4. As a conservative, I don't care if you smoke pot or even shoot up heroin, as long as you don't expect the government to clean up after your sorry ass or you infringe on the rights of others.
  5. As a conservative, if kids want to take a minute to pray in school them I support their right to do so. If atheists don't want to pray then they can read a book or sleep during that one minute.
 
  1. Liberals want to take guns away from law abiding folks; conservatives want these citizens who want them to be able to own them unhindered.
  2. Liberals want the government to pay for abortions and infringe on the parent's right to know what their child is doing. Conservatives want the lives of unborn to be protected.
  3. Liberals want the government to sanction unnatural unions and call them "marriage". Conservatives want to protect the fundamental core values of society.
  4. As a conservative, I don't care if you smoke pot or even shoot up heroin, as long as you don't expect the government to clean up after your sorry ass or you infringe on the rights of others.
  5. As a conservative, if kids want to take a minute to pray in school them I support their right to do so. If atheists don't want to pray then they can read a book or sleep during that one minute.

Yeah.

Any comment on the topic?
 
Eh, I kinda agree with the OP. The whole 'cannot tell a state to allow blah blah blah' isn't entirely true as that's is somewhat absolved with th 14A. States cannot surpress the rights of people. Now if the author wants to rgue if carrying is a right, that's a different story.
 
Eh, I kinda agree with the OP. The whole 'cannot tell a state to allow blah blah blah' isn't entirely true as that's is somewhat absolved with th 14A. States cannot surpress the rights of people. Now if the author wants to rgue if carrying is a right, that's a different story.

Do you see any contradiction in his discussion of the 2nd ammendment?

I mean, what the fuck, either you support the constition or you don't.
 
This is proof that liberals are really authoritarians in disguise. Instead of supporting a limited federal government required by the 10th Amendment, they'd rather abolish it for supreme federal power
 
This is proof that liberals are really authoritarians in disguise. Instead of supporting a limited federal government required by the 10th Amendment, they'd rather abolish it for supreme federal power

This comment is based on what?
I have no interest in abolishing the constitution.

My point is that the tenthers are extremists and not very realistic, as best as I can determine.

There is one posting on here now, his posts are jibberish.
 
This comment is based on what?
I have no interest in abolishing the constitution.

My point is that the tenthers are extremists and not very realistic, as best as I can determine.

There is one posting on here now, his posts are jibberish.
what is it based on? The simple statement by you that equates a group committed to limited federal power to 'idiots' and extremists. What could possibly be extreme about protecting freedom?
 
This comment is based on what?
I have no interest in abolishing the constitution.

My point is that the tenthers are extremists and not very realistic, as best as I can determine.

There is one posting on here now, his posts are jibberish.


Just because you're too stupid to understand his post does not mean its 'jibberish'....
 
what is it based on? The simple statement by you that equates a group committed to limited federal power to 'idiots' and extremists. What could possibly be extreme about protecting freedom?

So far, the guy posting here is indicating that he believes every action presently being taken by the federal government is illegal.

To me this is an extreme stance.
 
My topic doesn't have five points, only one.
My point is that the tenther's platform is a contradiction.

Your article states the following to support its premise:
What does supporting the Constitution mean? Many people who call themselves “Conservative” have rebuked us for betraying conservative principles ie… Gun Rights, Abortion, Homosexual Marriage, Drugs and prayer in school to name a few.

And I disputed all five points by showing what conservatives actually believe, not what he presumes them to believe.
 
Your article states the following to support its premise:

And I disputed all five points by showing what conservatives actually believe, not what he presumes them to believe.

Wait, trying to follow you, Are you saying you agree with me, but want me to refute your argument?
 
Back
Top