- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
The Constitution is in no way linked to the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution is, at its core, a limitation of citizens rights for a consolidation of government to potentially bluster the nation. In this frame, the very citizens that are being censored absolutely need protection or a buffer against a more powerful government. The Bill of Rights enumerates very specific terms in order for the "necessary and proper" clauses of government to be unable to trample the basis of human rights. Without the inclusion of a Bill of Rights this Constitution looks and reads more like monarchy than it already is.
Taxing power is the very reason we broke from Great Britain and you suggest we replace it with an exact replica in our Confederation? Our current taxing system won us a war against the largest military force in the world. How can ultimate power rest in the hands of the people when the very people are being suppressed by debt and taxes. As Brutus puts in "Without money they cannot be supported and they[the states] will dwindle away, and as before observed, their powers absorbed in that of the general government. "(P.310) These new tax powers of the central government will bankrupt the states and leave no room for support nor opposition to an unjust government.
And what of the vast majority of time that our nation is at peace? A dictator or faction strong arms the majority into subservience because it is "Necessary and Proper" to the safety of the country? Moreover, even in the case of needed immediate action cannot we trust in our own people? If England or Spain invaded tomorrow, I am sure our delegates would unanimously agree on swift action. This vague stating of powers can only lead to disaster, or worse, monarchy. As Brutus puts it "... the power in the federal legislative, to raise and support armies at pleasure, as well in peace as in war, and their control over the militia, tend, not only to a consolidation of the government, but the destruction of liberty."
(New Military Power)
A standing military is a ridiculous demand and a clear power grab. The Constitution advocates for a standing army even at times of peace. Their attempt at consolidation of new found power is doubly dangerous with their standing army. As Brutus detailed "the new over-powerful central government would use a standing army to crush local militias."(P.255) The Federalists are creating a government that is impossible to be loyal to while also being impossible to resist, we have a name for this, tyranny.
(Necessary and Proper Clause)
An enormous oversight of the Constitution is the vague and malicious Section 8th, Article 1st, Clause 19. Where in the Constitution advocates anything done by the government as long as it is "Necessary and Proper". The Federalists continually defend the Constitution with claims of Enumerated powers and thus the limitation of power, but this very clause goes against this and advocates a loophole in government checks and balances. Moreover, this is completely snuffs the sovereignty of the States and censors their influence, Brutus I explains this by saying "... from these articles that there is no need of any intervention of the state governments, between the Congress and the people, to execute any one power...". Brutus's claim runs deep as the Constitution continually censors and softens the States for complete tyranny.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!