I think the South had plenty of justification for secession... state's rights seemed to have a lot more meaning back then. Today, the 10th Amendment seems to be the one that can be easily ignored by the feds.<quoted text>I'm in the process of reading the memoirs of Jefferson Davis right now. I am (according to Kindle) about 20% done, and he's still working on justifying secession.
It's amazing how topical many of his 'constitutional' arguments seem.
Most of the Confederate soldiers were not slave owners, but they didn't believe the federal government should be telling the South how to run their states, and intefere with their economy.
I always felt that slavery would have soon died on its own, without the need for 600,000 Americans to die, and the irreparable damage the Civil War had on the 10th Amendment.
I think you already know my thoughts on this. I don't care that al-Awlaki and the other dirtballs got whacked, I'm actually happy that they're dead. But without some kind of independent oversight to justify the killing of American Citizens without due process, I worry about where this may go.I see the Fifth & Sixth Amendment issues in the targeted killings of American al Qaeda members overseas, and I'm all for some kind of real solution. I'm not sure the ones proffered so far (FISA style courts and briefing Congressional leaders) are a real solution to the dilemma here.
The 1st Amendment allows for free speech, but a private business may fire any employee that makes statements against the businesses' core beliefs and goals. I believe the same should be true for an owner's religious beliefs. He should be not be forced to violate his religious beliefs, as long as it's not illegal, anymore than he should have to allow employees the free speech to badmouth his business.I can even see, at least to an extent, the First Amendment arguments about the requirement for providing birth control. I'm not convinced that requiring a business entity to meet certain requirements amounts to "prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
Face it, your boy doesn't have much respect for the limitations that the Constitution intentionally imposes on the federal government's powers. obama seems to see the Constitution as a huge inconvenience to implementing his federal nanny state... not the law of the land that he swore to uphold and protect.