I think you make a lot of good points in the dilemma over state powers versus federal powers. I'd like to point out a worthwhile inconsistency in your argument about South Carolina's rebellion, however.
The Civil War (and again, I was raised 2 miles from where the damn thing started) was an act of immoral rebellion against a legitimate authority.... South Carolina agreed and ratified the Constitution, there was no justification for secession or the violence that followed, they committed immoral rebellion.
I do not believe that their rebellion was illegal. The federal government was legally over-stepping their bounds, as provided by the Bill of Rights added to the Constitution which South Carolina signed. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Furthermore, I firmly believe that this country's founders, the people who wrote the Constitution, built the new government with the hopes that it would succeed, but also with the hope that a corrupt government would be overthrown by the people.
If South Carolina wasn't following both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution, I've yet to see a state that has come any closer!
Right off the top of my head, I've got two things that point to Ahmadinejad being listed among the insane.
1)Holocaust denial. That one was easy. Do I need to develop this further, or do you understand the implications of someone's sanity/grasp on reality when they deny a hugely-documented recent historical event?
2)The man was a member of the Basiji Force (http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/19/news/tehra n.php), which considers itself the judge, jury and executioner. They believe that they have authority to find and kill people who are unholy (as you read in the article, this includes such things so despicable as a couple walking down a street hand-in-hand).
So are you asking me whether or not this man will hold back extreme force in the face of what he considers immoral?
I work in the education field, and I die a little bit inside each time the administration tells me I have to "protect" a student from a harsh reality, rather than teach them to be able to deal with it. What I am doing each time is pulling the suport out from underneath them. What pisses me off the most is that we do this in the face of basic psychology.
When did you learn how to drive? When you watched your parents for 16 years, or when you got behind the wheel for the first time? The odds are that you learned more about driving in the one day that you spent behind the wheel than you learned in the 16 years you were in the backseat.
In Psych 101 you learn what real-life experience has taught us all along: the best way to learn is by doing. By blocking Wikipedia, instead of teaching students how to deal with it, this school is only setting these kids up for greater failure.
That's ridiculous! Are you telling me that there were only two people running for office in 2004? I remember all sorts of people running.
Although I agree that the choice between Bush or Kerry was like a choice between castration or amputation, there were other candidates out there! I wish that my fellow Americans did not feel like their votes counted for so little that they really only have the choice between an idiot that the Republicans give us and a lunatic offered by the Democrats, a spineless party who sacrificed its constituents when it chose a sure loser against Bush so that it could win in 2008.
Slashdot Mirror
The Civil War (and again, I was raised 2 miles from where the damn thing started) was an act of immoral rebellion against a legitimate authority.... South Carolina agreed and ratified the Constitution, there was no justification for secession or the violence that followed, they committed immoral rebellion.
I do not believe that their rebellion was illegal. The federal government was legally over-stepping their bounds, as provided by the Bill of Rights added to the Constitution which South Carolina signed. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Furthermore, I firmly believe that this country's founders, the people who wrote the Constitution, built the new government with the hopes that it would succeed, but also with the hope that a corrupt government would be overthrown by the people.
If South Carolina wasn't following both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution, I've yet to see a state that has come any closer!
1)Holocaust denial. That one was easy. Do I need to develop this further, or do you understand the implications of someone's sanity/grasp on reality when they deny a hugely-documented recent historical event?
2)The man was a member of the Basiji Force (http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/19/news/tehra n.php), which considers itself the judge, jury and executioner. They believe that they have authority to find and kill people who are unholy (as you read in the article, this includes such things so despicable as a couple walking down a street hand-in-hand).
So are you asking me whether or not this man will hold back extreme force in the face of what he considers immoral?
I work in the education field, and I die a little bit inside each time the administration tells me I have to "protect" a student from a harsh reality, rather than teach them to be able to deal with it. What I am doing each time is pulling the suport out from underneath them. What pisses me off the most is that we do this in the face of basic psychology.
When did you learn how to drive? When you watched your parents for 16 years, or when you got behind the wheel for the first time? The odds are that you learned more about driving in the one day that you spent behind the wheel than you learned in the 16 years you were in the backseat.
In Psych 101 you learn what real-life experience has taught us all along: the best way to learn is by doing. By blocking Wikipedia, instead of teaching students how to deal with it, this school is only setting these kids up for greater failure.
That's ridiculous! Are you telling me that there were only two people running for office in 2004? I remember all sorts of people running.
Although I agree that the choice between Bush or Kerry was like a choice between castration or amputation, there were other candidates out there! I wish that my fellow Americans did not feel like their votes counted for so little that they really only have the choice between an idiot that the Republicans give us and a lunatic offered by the Democrats, a spineless party who sacrificed its constituents when it chose a sure loser against Bush so that it could win in 2008.