Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums
Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.
Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!
how about; if you don't pay taxes you cannot vote.
Already been tried, it doesn't work.
......but it's also how we know that Rights can't be taxed.
Voting is not a right.
It is.
That's why Poll taxes were found to be unConstitutional. It's a tax on a Right.
Our Rights are not limited by what is listed as our Rights in the Constitution.
Rights don't come from corrupt Stuporeme Kourt kangaroos.
Enumerated rights are listed in the Constitution.
Voting, is a qualified privilege. At the time the Constitution was ratified, states were free to set qualifications. Many required land ownership. All forbade women voting. Many required payment of either a Poll Tax or payment of other taxes, to qualify.
The right of Speech, the right to publish, the right to keep and bear arms, are protected rights - that come from the Natural Rights of Man, the right of life, liberty, and protection of personal private property.
Voting is not among those.
AND, in the Federalist, IIRC, one of the essays spoke AGAINST universal sufferage. It was well known by philosophers, and later, Marx, that universal franchise was a step to destruction of republican government. Give a voice to those who have no stake in the community, often because they have no skill, they do not contribute or participate, and because of low intellect or ignorance, they cannot understand the issues.
Bastiat also warned in his tome, The Law, that once the People understood they could vote themselves largesse out of the public coffers, effectively everyone plundering everyone, it would be the end of that government.
For better or worse, they're the ones who get the final say, when it comes to Constitutional matters.
Ok, but that is not an exhaustive list of our Rights.
Qualified in that ya gotta be a citizen to do it.
Again, the Rights actually listed in the Constitution are not exhaustive.
If it were, the 9th Amendment would be wholly unnecessary.
I presume you've read it, but if not I will include it's text for you.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Off the top of my head, an example would be the Right to travel.
....and whether you agree or not, voting is another one.
All of our Rights are regulated to some degree.
Even the ones you listed.
As to what degree those regulations cover, can be argued.
....but that is a different discussion.
All I am saying is that today, voting is in fact a Right for adult citizens who aren't incarcerated.
....and whether felons can vote depends on the State. In many they can.
For better worse, under our Constitution, adult citizens do in fact have the Right to vote.
As to whether or not that's a good idea, is a different thing.
For instance, IMHO renters should be barred from voting in elections that are asking whether or not to raise property taxes.
I agree that only land owners should be allowed to vote on stuff like that.
Male landowners could also choose to vote for largesse, if they chose to. No one is above the possibility of being corrupted, given the right circumstances.
The main goal should be to keep that off the ballot to begin with.
That doesn't make it a right, either.
It makes it the law of the land. And NOT...LEGALLY! NO Constitutional section or subpart gives the Stuporeme Kourt this right - it was APPROPRIATED in Marbury-v-Madison.
Bad law should be overturned - by the States that are the underfooting of the Federal government - and those who issue these illegal edicts, TRIED AND EXECUTED.
Then and now.
Instead of correcting this corrupt process, we're following it blindly. I repeat: Voting is not a right. Rights come from Natural Law, or God if you like...the right of Man to life, liberty, and private property, which is the result of his productive labor.
Nothing in that paradigm includes the right to an abortion, the rights of sodomites to mock marriage, the right to vote. Those are what the Left has forced on us using language they believe we will not dare question.
It is the job of the Supreme Court to determine the Constitutionality of laws when there is controversy.
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.
Their judicial power extends to ALL cases. Including those which the United States is a party.
That means the SC has jurisdiction to hear cases against that which the gov has done.
Ie: judging the law as to it's harmony WITH the Constitution, or lack thereof.
In your opinion, what exactly is the SC there for, if not to be the final judge of what is Constitutional, and what is not?
Should Congress just be able to enact any law they want, regardless of that law's Constitutionality?
If so, how do we get rid of unConstitutional laws?
- Messages
- 19,687
- Reaction score
- 11,681
- Points
- 288
It's also a way to keep track of everyone.
It is to interpret disputes using the Constitution as a measure.
It is NOT to interpret the Constitution!
CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW...means exactly that. THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, is self-explanatory.
The Kourts, thinking they're God's oracle, or gods themselves, have ruled as they wish reality is.
The STATES, that voted to ratify the Constitution or to be admitted to the Union, should have final say on what the meanings of the plainly-worded document, are. Through legislative vote, with a 3/5 majority.
The problem is in the SC not using Originalism in order to interpret it with.
- Messages
- 19,687
- Reaction score
- 11,681
- Points
- 288
It's not an official campaign commercial. The "Massie Meme Militia" isn't a real thing AFAIK.
Yeah, really.
I don't know who this Massie Meme Militia is...but this is gonna be counter-effective.
It's not persuasive at all.
Imagine what that "smart" phone now smells like.
