posted
It could happen, yes. But not the way you described it. Many more changes would have to take place beyond just 'Muslims taking over the city council'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I agree with a city that is mostly Muslim shutting down all the bars and mandating women covered in the streets. A Burka is no different than laws requiring Bikini tops. Men and women are equal under the law, why should women be required to cover their breasts when men are not? This isn't a legal question rather a cultural one. Where in the constitution is it required to wear a top if you are a female?
I believe our founding fathers understood the best government is the one that is closest to the people. The power pyramid is local, state, federal. If the majority of your local govt is against the consumption of meat and you aren't, move to another town. What happens when the national government outlaws meat consumption?
Think about it. The strongest powers, constitutionally are given to the local government. Very few are granted to the national. This creates a place where people can live as they choose. If the majority in your area are against you, move to an area you prefer. When these things are vested in the federal govt, there is no escape...no freedom. The only rights the local governments cannot remove are the few spelled out in the constitution to the federal government. Like the right to bear arms, search and seizure, free speech, etc. Healthcare is not there. There are no federal laws regarding lawn mowing or watering of one's lawn. Some towns have an abundance of water, others do not. Should their be a federal law concerning the watering of lawns due to our national interest in water preservation? Our founders understood the best government is one that is closest to the people. We have states that have instituted state healthcare policies...I am in agreement with those states. It is their right since it isn't in the pervue of the federal government. If you want universal healthcare, move to OR or MA. If you're sick of the taxes, move out of OR or MA....gotta love freedom.
The constitution limits federal powers and leaves broad powers to the states.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Parkour, the US was formed as a federation of sovereign states. Most of the power of the central government dates from your civil war.
The formation of the united states removed sovereignty from the individual states, so it was not formed as a coalition of sovereign states. It became a sovereign federation comprised of states with a good degree of autonomy for internal regulation of some affairs.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
" Where in the constitution is it required to wear a top if you are a female?" For wearing a top--no where. For wearing a Burka, or requiring head scarves-- the Separation of Church and State. Any woman in that town who would not wish to wear such clothing, or who would be fined/jailed for its absence would simply sue, take it to court, and get the thing thrown out.
Mal, your arguments seem to miss some basic facts.
51% Muslim does not equal Majority Fanatic Muslim.
The Power of the City Government while broader in scope, does not trump State or Federal government. There are safety precautions in those that protect the minorities--even the white male protestant minority.
Our war in Afghanistan and Iraq will in no way change the amount of Islamic believers in the US. Saying, "They are taking over in Michigan so lets just carpet bomb Iraq" does not make sense.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Parkour, the US was formed as a federation of sovereign states. Most of the power of the central government dates from your civil war.
The formation of the united states removed sovereignty from the individual states, so it was not formed as a coalition of sovereign states. It became a sovereign federation comprised of states with a good degree of autonomy for internal regulation of some affairs.
I don't think this is as clear-cut as you make it out to believe. There's a well known grammatical observation that suggests otherwise.
posted
It is possible, but if you grant that the definition of sovereignty applies in determining whether or not an entity like, say, Virginia is sovereign, then the states were not sovereign the second they became included in the United States.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
