“My goal here is to shine light on the fact that the federal government is overstepping its bounds,” said State Sen. Tony Fulton of Lincoln. “We would be making a statement on behalf of Nebraska."However, an obviously liberal state senator impugned the integrity of those supporting the resolution, implying that it was "racist:"
State Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln said the proposals sound disturbingly similar to the states' rights arguments made in defense of racial segregation and laws blocking blacks from voting.“The history of this movement is rife with racism in the name of states' rights,” he said. “I'm not saying that the people making the case now are racist, but I don't think Nebraska needs to be getting in bed with these kinds of resolutions.”
States' rights are guaranteed by the 10th amendment, which states:
The state of Massachusetts had cited the 10th amendment in its decision to legalize gay marriage within its borders -- and it is correct in stating it is the right of the states to make that decision. So according to Bill Avery, if you support "States' Rights" then you must be in favor of gay marriage. Brilliant logic, Avery.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.
Other issues that are (or should be) within the rights of the states under the 10th amendment are:
- abortion (either for or against, notwithstanding the bad law of Roe v. Wade)
- medical marijuana
- right to carry
- age of consent
- legalized gambling
What is interesting in the article noted above is that Arizona has proposed a resolution that would exempt its citizens from a federal health care plan. I love it!
The Revolution continues. Read it all here.
No comments:
Post a Comment