primitives being Constitutional scholars

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=226x6777

Oh my.

margotb822  (1000+ posts)        Tue Nov-04-08 12:21 PM
Original message
 
Help with info on the Founding Fathers

I am in a discussion with someone who only has the states' rights view of the founding fathers. Does anyone have a good link to the whole debate that played out and resulted in the 10th Amendment? Thanks!!

mrcheerful (1000+ posts)      Tue Nov-04-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
 
2. The civil war started over states rights vs federal law's

That fight still continues today with cons claiming its up to states while enacting federal laws prohibating state laws.

MannyGoldstein  (1000+ posts)        Tue Nov-04-08 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
 
6. The Specific Context Was Slavery

The Constitution was clearly being violated by the South.

mrcheerful (1000+ posts)      Tue Nov-04-08 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
 
8. The slave issue didn't come into play until England wanted to get into the civil
war on the souths side. What the civil war actually started over is Lincoln being elected instead of the guy the south supported. Excuse me but names escape me at times old age and all. But civil war history is filled with more myths then facts, at least what is being taught in schools.

MannyGoldstein  (1000+ posts)        Tue Nov-04-08 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #8
 
9. I Believe That The Specific Concern Is That Lincoln Would Take Their Slaves

IIRC, Lincoln was a powerful opponent of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the act that potentially extended slavery into states that ought to have been free states per the Constitution. The South was afraid that ending the Kansas-Nebraska Act would be the starting point for nationwide abolition.

nerddem (351 posts)      Tue Nov-04-08 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
 
3. well it was the early states rights crew that wanted it

the federalists were generally in favor of a more centralized state so the tenth was a concession. I guess you can maybe look through the federalist papers, which are pretty easy to find on the net. There were also a few anti federalist articles written by jeffersons people/early democrats that explain the states' rights side.

MannyGoldstein  (1000+ posts)        Tue Nov-04-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
 
4. Depends On What You're Looking For

The Federalist Papers were a good discussion, but not amongst *all* of the Founders.

Probably the Constitution itself is the best place to look: they knew exactly what they were writing. As I read it:

- They were more pro-states-rights than the courts tend to interpret today.

- They left ambiguities on purpose when they couldn't quite settle on something, or when they wanted future flexibility in interpretation.

All that being said, I'm a total rank amateur at the Constitution, so my interpretation is liable to be totally wrong.

zipplewrath  (233 posts)     Tue Nov-04-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
 
5. Federalist Papers

That's as close as you'll probably get. And that is unfortunate because they predate the Bill of Rights and the 10th amendment. There isn't nearly the documentation on the debate about the BoR that one might expect in these modern times. I've heard tell that the "militia clause" was added to the 2nd after one of the initial drafts, and no one know who or why. Wrt to the 10th, the thing that must be remembered is that this admendment was an "antifederalist" amendment in essence and the federalists (who basically won the arguments about the original constitution) weren't the proponents of "states rights" per se. States rights arguments are made by people who probably wouldn't have supported the original constitution.

The skumbag primitive's there too, but didn't say anything relevant.

[JohnnyReb]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=226x6777

Oh my.

The skumbag primitive's there too, but didn't say anything relevant.

Which brings to mind the age old question, "Do DUmmies ever say anything relevant?"

[USA4ME]

None of them even tried to answer the question.

margotb822

 
Help with info on the Founding Fathers

I am in a discussion with someone who only has the states' rights view of the founding fathers.

Because that's how they viewed it, as 13 separate "states," like 13 mini-nations, who made their own agreements and contracts between themselves and other sovereign nations, but with an agreement that they'd work in conjunction on matters like national defense.  Any attempt to define what the founding fathers intended as anything other than this is reinventing history.

.

[Splashdown]

The DUmmies have a grasp of the Constitution almost as good as Obama or Biden.



 

[Chris_]

The DUmmies have a grasp of the Constitution almost as good as Obama or Biden.



 

History is not taught in the publik skewlz anymore.