Conservative's ForumConservative's Discussion ForumsConstitutional Issues › Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Poll
Poll Question: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
bars   pie

The Federal Government    
  1 (7.1%)
The people of The US Collectively    
  2 (14.3%)
The States Which Created The Union    
  4 (28.6%)
The People of The States    
  5 (35.7%)
The Constitution    
  2 (14.3%)




Total votes: 14
« Created by: Shooterman on: 05/23/12 at 10:39:50 »
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US? (Read 15,238 times)
Big Steve
CF Vice Presidents Club
*****
Offline

Conservative's Forum

Posts: 4,878
Location: S. Illinois
Joined: 07/09/11
Gender: Male
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #20 - 05/30/12 at 19:09:50
Print Post  
Shooterman wrote on 05/26/12 at 00:07:52:
That does seem to be the concept in today's language after the gulag training of the public schools, but a reading of the Founders disproves that presumption.



Read much?  Note I said "present tense."  Your OP was poorly stated.  Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Shooterman
CF Presidents Club
*****
Offline

Dum spiro pugno

Posts: 9,972
Joined: 03/01/11
Gender: Male
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #21 - 05/31/12 at 08:53:41
Print Post  
Big Steve wrote on 05/30/12 at 19:09:50:
Read much?  Note I said "present tense."  Your OP was poorly stated.  Cheesy



Silly me, Steve. I should have stated constitutionally.
  

Our Bill of Rights constitutes a cluster of little foxholes of liberty ground into the hard cold face of history by helpless men for a shield against the lash of tyrants. They are the result of distrust of power and distrust of men in power. They are a recognition of Lord Acton's statement of a truth eternal--"power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."R. CARTER PITTMAN&&Dalton, Ga., Sept. 28, 1955.DRAFT JAN MORGAN FOR PRESIDENT!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TheMusician2
Leading CF Member
***
Offline

Conservative's Forum

Posts: 204
Location: VA Beach, VA
Joined: 06/19/12
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #22 - 07/06/12 at 06:16:05
Print Post  
Picker wrote on 05/30/12 at 16:10:34:
It seems to me, that the transfer of power from the citizen to the government, is not a result of the government grabbing power.  It is the result of the people surrendering power to the government.  In most cases, the people trade their power for monetary gain.  Federal aid comes with strings that bind.

Also, compromise, the grease which makes the congress work, usually involves retreat on demands or principle.  The Founders had a really tough job, and it isn't done yet.  


I agree. The reason why politicians feel they have to lie is because the people have to let them do the things they do. They can't (to some extent) say "we are just going to do this, this, and this." and expect no one to object. The blame, IMO falls on the people as well as the law makers.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Trip
CF Full Member
**
Offline

facta non verba

Posts: 60
Location: Forge of Freedom
Joined: 08/05/12
Gender: Male
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #23 - 08/05/12 at 10:18:17
Print Post  
It is said that the "people of  the states" are sovereign, but perhaps that needs to be further defined to those people in those states actually being "citizens".

  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Trip
CF Full Member
**
Offline

facta non verba

Posts: 60
Location: Forge of Freedom
Joined: 08/05/12
Gender: Male
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #24 - 08/05/12 at 10:31:00
Print Post  


The Tenth Amendment indicates the authority of the states, but you'll notice that it is preceded by the 9th Amendment indicating individual rights that are not even enumerated.  And nowhere does the 10th Amendment indicate that states "rights" (Powers) supersede those individual rights.

This might lead to a very heated discussion.. particularly in reference to Romney's description of "RomneyCare" as "Fifty flavors of democracy" under a distortion of that 10th Amendment.
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Picker
CF Vice Presidents Club
*****
Offline

Conservative's Forum

Posts: 1,715
Joined: 07/06/11
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #25 - 08/06/12 at 00:20:26
Print Post  
Trip, is not a vote of a state the collective vote of its people?  If so, then how can vote of a state be different from a vote of the people? Any sovereignty exercised by a state is lent to the state by the consent of its people.  Why would it not be correct, then, to say that the sovereignty rests with either one or both?  To carry it further, the states lend their sovereignty to the federal government, with the result that a federal action springing from that consent ultimately comes with approval of the people as a whole.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Trip
CF Full Member
**
Offline

facta non verba

Posts: 60
Location: Forge of Freedom
Joined: 08/05/12
Gender: Male
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #26 - 08/06/12 at 15:44:10
Print Post  
Picker wrote on 08/06/12 at 00:20:26:
Trip, is not a vote of a state the collective vote of its people?  If so, then how can vote of a state be different from a vote of the people? Any sovereignty exercised by a state is lent to the state by the consent of its people.  Why would it not be correct, then, to say that the sovereignty rests with either one or both?  To carry it further, the states lend their sovereignty to the federal government, with the result that a federal action springing from that consent ultimately comes with approval of the people as a whole.


Actually "sovereignty" rests with the people, individually, and not the collective people of a state. We have no "group sovereignty" and what is legitimate ise not subject to any sort of collective tyranny of the majority.

The only sovereign authority exercised by a state, comes from the authority lent that state (not surrendered) by the people who are within it.

Individually, as free citizens, we are sovereigns (literally "kings") without subjects.

The distinction of our sovereignty involves the recognition of the difference between citizens and subjects, and is reflected in Chief Justice John Jay‟s opinion in Chisholm v. Georgia, the first great constitutional case decided after the ratification of the Constitution of 1789:

    “ [A]t the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects . . . .”


Justice James Wilson confirmed Jay‟s articulation of the opposition between subjects snd citizens:
    "The term 'citizen' reflects the notion that individual citizens are sovereign in a republic, whereas the term 'subject' reflects feudal and monarchical conceptions of the lord or monarch as sovereign and the individual as the subject."


By the deliberate intent of the Founders, we did not transfer the sovereign authority of a monarch from one individual to a collective majority; we are deliberately not a democracy.  

To reiterate the Tory, Mather Byles, "Which is better - to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?", the obvious answer is "neither is better".

And indeed the founders did not compel us to yield our rights to those 3,000 tyrants one mile away. We are not subject to the whims of those "3,000 tyrants", be they local (state) or in the federal government.  

Under the U.S. Constitution people are entitled to want whatever they want, but they are limited in what they might expect to receive by the unalienable individual rights of fellow citizens.

The states themselves are not sovereign, but rather the individuals within those states hold the sovereignty. There are no "group rights" recognized in this country, and therefore there is only individual sovereignty.  Meanwhile globalist socialist agendas invariably fabricate group, collective "rights".

In emphasis, the 10th Amendment does not anywhere give the states "power" to subvert the unalienable rights of sovereign individuals, and this is fundamentally why Romney's RomneyCare is also inherently unconstitutional, and a corruption of the Constitution.  

In fact it is the ongoing intent of the U.N.'s "Agenda 21" to employ that corruption of the 10th Amendment to subject Americans to foreign authority and unconstitutional denial of property rights, and this is why Romney's view is so very dangerous.









  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Trip
CF Full Member
**
Offline

facta non verba

Posts: 60
Location: Forge of Freedom
Joined: 08/05/12
Gender: Male
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #27 - 08/08/12 at 06:17:49
Print Post  
Shooterman wrote on 05/23/12 at 14:52:28:
Whoa, slow down for this old boy. What citizens, collectively? State? Nation?

I hope I am wrong, but my reading of your answer, is that the citizens of the US, collectively formed the union, which is the antithesis of what the Founders advocated.


I suggest, Pick, that by determining who formed the union, then the question as to who authorized the forming of the union will be answered.


A pertinent question is if it is even possible to have  a "collective" sovereignty for those citizens, and if that sovereignty can reasonably prevails over individual's sovereignty over themselves.  If there is such a collective soveregnty of the people of a state, then what specifically are they sovereign over?  If this were true then we would be a Democracy, something which the founders deliberately avoided, and most in this discussion seem to  recognize.

During the first several Republican Primary debates, Romney commented about Massachusetts "RomneyCare" in a way that truly disturbed me. He described RomneyCare being justified under the 10th Amendment "states rights" as each state being able to exercise their own desires, resulting in "Fifty Flavors of Democracy" (Romney's words).

Romney went on, and it troubled me even further,  indicating that an individual's "rights" consisted of being able to go to some other state if they did not like that "flavor" of democracy.  (We must be fortunate that we are not compelled to remain in that state).

My thought was this would reduce us allegedly free citizens to being nothing but refugees in our own country, fleeing from state to state in the desperate hope that one state might continue to recognize our individual freedoms rather than imposing collective democratic tyranny upon us. That's not much freedom or "rights" at all.   RomneyCare, like ObamaCare, presumes individuals sovereignty over their own bodies can be subverted by the will of the majority, thereby taking from us our innate ownership of our own bodies.   If we are to allow this, then none of our other rights have any hope of standing.

I was disturbed that none of the other candidates spoke up and indicated what a fundamental corruption of the 10th Amendment Romney's "Fifty Flavors" is, not even Bachmann the Tea Party candidate.  

The founders never indicated, nor implied, that it was infinitely preferable to have our rights taken from us by a state tyranny rather than a federal tyranny. In fact the 10th Amendment itself does not even imply that "states rights" (powers) in any way supersede individual rights.  The 9th Amendment precedes the 10th Amendment, and those individual rights are the only thing recognized by those founders as being "unalienable".

I was thinking about making this "fifty flavor" claim the subject of a thread,  knowing that some would vehemently disagree with my take on it.

I would sincerely like to hear your thoughts on this, guys.

  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Picker
CF Vice Presidents Club
*****
Offline

Conservative's Forum

Posts: 1,715
Joined: 07/06/11
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #28 - 08/09/12 at 14:43:15
Print Post  
Trip wrote on 08/08/12 at 06:17:49:
A pertinent question is if it is even possible to have  a "collective" sovereignty for those citizens, and if that sovereignty can reasonably prevails over individual's sovereignty over themselves.  If there is such a collective soveregnty of the people of a state, then what specifically are they sovereign over?  If this were true then we would be a Democracy, something which the founders deliberately avoided, and most in this discussion seem to  recognize.

During the first several Republican Primary debates, Romney commented about Massachusetts "RomneyCare" in a way that truly disturbed me. He described RomneyCare being justified under the 10th Amendment "states rights" as each state being able to exercise their own desires, resulting in "Fifty Flavors of Democracy" (Romney's words).

Romney went on, and it troubled me even further,  indicating that an individual's "rights" consisted of being able to go to some other state if they did not like that "flavor" of democracy.  (We must be fortunate that we are not compelled to remain in that state).

My thought was this would reduce us allegedly free citizens to being nothing but refugees in our own country, fleeing from state to state in the desperate hope that one state might continue to recognize our individual freedoms rather than imposing collective democratic tyranny upon us. That's not much freedom or "rights" at all.   RomneyCare, like ObamaCare, presumes individuals sovereignty over their own bodies can be subverted by the will of the majority, thereby taking from us our innate ownership of our own bodies.   If we are to allow this, then none of our other rights have any hope of standing.

I was disturbed that none of the other candidates spoke up and indicated what a fundamental corruption of the 10th Amendment Romney's "Fifty Flavors" is, not even Bachmann the Tea Party candidate.  

The founders never indicated, nor implied, that it was infinitely preferable to have our rights taken from us by a state tyranny rather than a federal tyranny. In fact the 10th Amendment itself does not even imply that "states rights" (powers) in any way supersede individual rights.  The 9th Amendment precedes the 10th Amendment, and those individual rights are the only thing recognized by those founders as being "unalienable".

I was thinking about making this "fifty flavor" claim the subject of a thread,  knowing that some would vehemently disagree with my take on it.

I would sincerely like to hear your thoughts on this, guys.



We need to differentiate between rights and sovereignty.  I see sovereignty as the authority to express rights.  That authority rests with the individual person, restrained only by temporary consent of the individual, in agreement with a majority of his/her peers.

While this may raise the tyranny-of-the-majority argument, the fact is that the lowest form of government, the town meeting, is a true democracy exercise.  County, State and Federal levels of government are examples of republican government, borrowing their authority from the representation of the peoples' will.

Unless the rulings of the majority can truly be classified as tyrannical, it is the duty of the minority to respect the will of the majority.  The opposite is anarchy.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Trip
CF Full Member
**
Offline

facta non verba

Posts: 60
Location: Forge of Freedom
Joined: 08/05/12
Gender: Male
Re: Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?
Reply #29 - 08/09/12 at 22:10:47
Print Post  
Picker wrote on 08/09/12 at 14:43:15:
We need to differentiate between rights and sovereignty.  I see sovereignty as the authority to express rights.  That authority rests with the individual person, restrained only by temporary consent of the individual, in agreement with a majority of his/her peers.

While this may raise the tyranny-of-the-majority argument, the fact is that the lowest form of government, the town meeting, is a true democracy exercise.  County, State and Federal levels of government are examples of republican government, borrowing their authority from the representation of the peoples' will.

Unless the rulings of the majority can truly be classified as tyrannical, it is the duty of the minority to respect the will of the majority.  The opposite is anarchy.





I'm not sure why rights and sovereignty must be differentiated.  If one  could have rights, but no authority to express them, those "rights" wouldnt have very much worth.  We are sovereign because we have an authority and rights that do not come from anyone else, and cannot be given up or forfeit --   unalienable.  


The majority is always a threat to the minority, and this is why the founders did not extend the vote to everyone.  This nation didn't deny the vote to women, blacks and even slaves, merely because of a dictatorial control, but because those groups, as well as others, were not deemed to have any responsibility within society and therefore did not have a viable interest in voting. The founders knew that if those without a ongoing, vested interest in property, would be able to vote, then they would be voting themselves the property of others, and that is exactly what we have today.

    "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury."
    Alexander Tytler



Did not Obama win by a majority of the vote, but they don't  seem to care about his associations, his ideology, his redistribution of some person's property to the benefit of others, his being the decider about who is is a "winner" and who is a "loser" according to the government. The will of that majority  cares little about  the constraints placed upon it and government itself, and yet this is what our very freedoms hinge upon. as does our government's own legitimacy.

This regard for the "Democracy" and the will of the majority is the reason why even many Republicans are equally a hazard to this country and our freedoms, imagining that the will of the majority is able to subvert those unalienable individual rights and compel free Americans to subvert their rights to themselves to participate in the vile corruption that is RomneyCare.

After the Obama 2008 election it was common to hear from the left that "elections have consequences" or that we cannot be subject to tyranny if we got the opportunity to vote yet these are both ideas antithetical to our form of government.   Our government was designed to prohibit the exercise of agendas by government in the structure of the Constitution.

NO, the will of the majority does not compel us to play by their rules, and to forfeit our property and our right even to our very selves. We've already established the limits of what the majority might receive, and that does not transgress upon those unalienable rights.  RomneyCare is outside the limits of legitimate government power, and the 10th Amendment does not provide it license.

If RomneyCare can take from us even the most innate rights to our own bodies under the sham of legitimate state authority, then we truly have no rights whatsoever, and we will soon be nothing but subjects of a U.N. globalist agenda.

There's nothing sacrosanct about the will of the majority, and it certainly is not cause to allow an agenda in conflict with this country's principles, and our freedoms.
« Last Edit: 08/10/12 at 01:38:52 by Trip »  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 
Send TopicPrint
 
Conservative's ForumConservative's Discussion ForumsConstitutional Issues › Where Does Sovereignty Lie Within The US?


ConservativesForum.com
CF Forums
The NCO Club - Military Forum - Constitutional Issues - Political Polls - Candidates Action - Economy
Conservative News Sources Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin forums
Political Activism, Strategy, Blogs - Conservative Sites - Games - Sports - Health - Poetry - Cooking - Library
Gun Rights - Conspiracy Theories - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Page 5


Conservatives Directory
conservative sites:
Daily Caller
Newsmax
Drudge Report
Sean Hannity Show
Rush Limbaugh
The American Thinker
Breitbart News
FrontPage Magazine
Right Bias
Rasmussen Reports
David Limbaugh
American Conservative Union
Accuracy in Media
News Busters
Newt Gingrich
Chicks on the Right
Mark Levin Show
Tea Party Patriots
Phyllis Schlafly Report
Conservative News
TruthUSA
Michelle Malkin
Right Wing News
Accuracy in Academia
Hotair
Powerline Blog
Conservative News Source
Conservative Activist

Conservative Blogs
Proudvet's Blog
Opinion Editorials
Political Polls
Twitter CF
Conservatives Directory Add Your Site
Conservative Blog Advertising
Forum Rules, User Agreement and Privacy Policy
Registering Information and Forum Rules