[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

Where does it say there are legitimate interpretations conjured by the government that we the people must except?

-Sun_Tzu-

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] No, you're not (necessarily) wrong because you don't happen to agree with my interpretation of the constitution (although you're probably wrong there too, but I digress). You're wrong because you refuse to even acknowledge that legitimate differing interpretations of the constitution are possible.

Abbeten

I explain why the government is violating the Constitution. You defend the government by saying it has it's own interpretation so it is allowed. What? Why are you defending the thing that the people gave power to? It has no rights. It is not a person. Where does it say there are legitimate interpretations conjured by the government that we the people must except? I'll tell you. Nowhere. That is the purpose of the tenth. Oh... and now we've come full circle. That's it.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]Um, I've already explained why, to which you replied "so what?"

If you're just going to talk past me then there's no point continuing this discussion.

-Sun_Tzu-

I explain why the government is violating the Constitution. You defend the government by saying it has it's own interpretation so it is allowed. What? Why are you defending the thing that the people gave power to? It has no rights. It is not a person. Where does it say there are legitimate interpretations conjured by the government that we the people must except? I'll tell you. Nowhere. That is the purpose of the tenth. Oh... and now we've come full circle. That's it.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] So what? So you're wrong, that's what. -Sun_Tzu-

If you're just going to talk past me then there's no point continuing this discussion.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] What purpose does the Supreme Court serve if the constitution doesn't require interpretation? -Sun_Tzu-

The government says, "We don't know what the founding fathers were thinking?"

What?! They wrote it down. All we have to do is read it!

So read it. The purpose for the Supreme Court is under Article 3. Section 2. It says, "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under the Constitution..." The power vested in the people granted to the Judicial branch.

The people say, "Hey. We need a fair courts that will respect our rights written in this constitution when others violate them."

The people of today should know their rights. Your question to me is evidence showing that you do not know your rights or who wrote the Constitution. That is what I am talking about.

[QUOTE="JLCrogue"]

[QUOTE="LOXO7"] People can have different interpretations of the law of the land? What is the purpose of having laws then? We live in an anarchy?sSubZerOo

Unfortunately, we all have to live with the tyranny of government. Anarchy would be nice, but too many people are afraid of it because of all the constant pro-government propaganda.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] What? That was an expression. It meant that I'm just going to leave you to your views since you seem incapable of understanding that people can have differing interpretations of the Constitution than you do. So we have nothing to discuss. -Sun_Tzu-

The government says, "We don't know what the founding fathers were thinking?"

What?! They wrote it down. All we have to do is read it!

So read it. The purpose for the Supreme Court is under Article 3. Section 2. It says, "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under the Constitution..." The power vested in the people granted to the Judicial branch.

The people say, "Hey. We need a fair courts that will respect our rights written in this constitution when others violate them."

The people of today should know their rights. Your question to me is evidence showing that you do not know your rights or who wrote the Constitution. That is what I am talking about.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="Abbeten"] What? That was an expression. It meant that I'm just going to leave you to your views since you seem incapable of understanding that people can have differing interpretations of the Constitution than you do. So we have nothing to discuss. Abbeten

My problem here is that you are taking a complicated situation and stripping it of all nuance and every shade of gray and pretending that it's easy, when it isn't.

But it is simple. Right and wrong. What is right in the United States? Freedom. Life. Property. What is wrong in the United States? Violating these rights. Is that difficult? "Wait wait. There is some gray here." Where?!

You are making it complex and hard to understand. That's what politicians do. They do this to violate your rights more. They want more laws and regulations because that's more government power. It's less power for us because we do nothing or assume government has power because that's what were taught. The law is black and white in the Constitution. It is individual power of the people granting power to the government. And you are incorrect when you say the US government has its own power that the individual have to obey.

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

[QUOTE="Abbeten"] Okay. You can continue thinking you're a special snowflake for having a different (and extremely limited) interpretation of the phrase 'general welfare.' I'll just let you do that.Abbeten